Obama Says Constitution Flawed, Framers Didn’t Get It Right

Credo quia absurdum. Talks pretty, walks pretty, CONcerned about the well being of ???? Says we need to give more welfare to poor non working African Americans, a more equal spreading of our wealth. God never got it right, and the Founders never got it right, Luciferianist communist Nobama Hussein Barackus followed by his Liberal Fascist blind hoard.

Bingo!

And who calls for justice?

A couple of constitutional law professors on an analysis of the FULL transcript of the interview in it’s actual context (Civil Rights):

http://volokh.com/posts/1225104785.shtml
http://volokh.com/posts/1225086611.shtml

I’m ideologically on your left, for sure, Tom but read all of the facts and listen to the transcript before passing on daily talking points from a campaign as facts. I stay out of the fray on most of your posts because I know we have an ideological disagreement.

An Obama presidency may be disagreeable to some, but is not to be feared. The Republican party’s commitment to conservatism ends at the ballot box – as evidenced by the last eight years of expansion of the executive branch and government as a whole. By that token, Obama is far more conservative than Bush on fiscal and constitutional matters.

I, for one, would like to have a President who has spent a fair amount of time analyzing the constitution and values it greatly – even if I disagree with him on nuances of it’s interpretation – rather than one who simply uses it to pander.

Something Oliver North wrote. which may prove to be something to remember in the next few years.

During Wednesday afternoon’s rush hour, I was making my way home on the Dulles Greenway, when a phalanx of police motorcycles and cruisers stopped all traffic and ordered us to pull our vehicles off the highway and onto the shoulders. Over a loudspeaker, we were told to stay put until the Obama campaign convoy passed. They were on their way to a rally in Leesburg, Va.

Instantly, hundreds of people were out of their cars. Directly in front of me, a group of supporters — evident by their bumper stickers — jumped out with cameras, cell phones and banners. They began chanting: “The messiah! He’s coming! Obama is coming!” The shouting only intensified as the candidate and his entourage — motorcycles, police cars, black Secret Service Chevy Suburbans, and buses — roared past us.

What I found so disturbing was seeing so many of my countrymen who apparently think — or believe or hope — that the next president of the United States will save us from ourselves. Sen. Obama has said we cannot “wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we’ve been waiting for.” He would do well to remember that unfulfilled expectations are the greatest cause of anger on the planet. That’s true whether it is between husbands and wives, students and teachers, employers and employees or leaders and the led. He also might recall that humility is a virtue that has distinguished our greatest leaders.

What all this means to the future of this republic, I don’t know. I’m a military historian, not a prophet. But I do know the first name of the Messiah. It’s not Mike. And it isn’t Barack, either.

Obama graduated Harvard Law School in 1991. He was a lecturer at the U. of Chicago law school between 1992 and 1996. During this time he was an attorney at the law firm of Miner, Barnhill & Galland. In his first years of teaching, he had only one course.

He was promoted to Senior Lecturer in 1996 and his teaching load eventually increased to three courses a year, less than the load of a professor.

Obama won a state Senate seat in 1996. Obama maintained his senior lecturer post from 1996 to 2004, when he took a leave to run for the U.S. Senate.

Nagorsky said there is a major distinction between a lecturer and senior lecturer, though both are not full-time positions.

She said the status of a senior lecturer is “similar” to the status of a professor and Obama did teach core courses usually handled only by professors.

While Obama was also part of the law school community, his appointment was not part of an academic search process and he did not have any scholarly research obligations which professors often do.

Again a case of too little experience! Was he teaching some one else’s instruction or Was he teaching unresearched personal ideas? (Did not have any scholarly RESEARCH obligations) Or is this a Joe the Plumber sort of question? I know this is going to be TALKED DOWN as just another diversion by the Obamabobble Heads. In my mind this is just another Red Flag.

I’m speaking just for myself. As Defined and (Patronized) by your Ideological base!

My Ideological base is: Red Neck,Hick,Racist, WASP, Bitter, Gun Toting, Bible Reading, God Fearing, Irrational, Zealots!

I disagree with all these labels with exception of the Bible and God Fearing and “Heavy” on the Gun Toting

You seriously think the wounds of this countries Division will ever be Healed.

If Obama is Critical of the Constitution How Does he get out of it (IF! he gets Sworn in as President) when the question of upholding this same constitution is submitted? Will he be holding his hand on the Bible?

The Amendment process was not flawed it was perfect, that is why the communists can only cheat when setting up amendments like the 14th red amendment, set up by red republicans during the post chaotic civil war period when in fact those southern war torn states congress members were not present during the voteing on this red 14th amendment. Thus the ratification process was illegal, later the 16th amendment as well was not properly ratified according to the founders designs, and the 17th also, never ratified. The proof is in those very ratification documents from the state legislative archives, which have been collected by true constitutional scholars. I have the photo copies of them myself and have studied them with explanations for years. The first twelve Amendments are all this nation needs, along with the hidden 13th amendment which is called the Titles and Nobility Act, and Also I have the proofs of ratification of this 13th amendemnt as well. The communists want to scrap the constitution along with the Bill of Rights which gives power to the people, in the sovereign de-jure version over government, versus your Roman Civil Rights which are priviledges, via the red 14th amendment and created subjects of the of the STATES and later via the 16th subjects of the people via contracts. The 17th was used to slip around congress having power only to adhere to sovereignty treatise with foreign powers or governments and nothing more, and create illegal treatises with the U.N. thus usurping this document further, and violating the popular government of the people. Since 1776 we have been in a fight over government of the many versus government by the few. Barack is no constitutional scholar, neither are the links provided above.
Sources;
Congress, Annals Records.
Congressional Library.
Dr. John Coleman. Author of several books, “What you should know about the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION and the BILL OF RIGHTS. Retired MI5 British Agent. Five years studies in Congressional Records, Annals and Records, Library of Congress.
Bill Benson; Over 35 years extensive Constitutional Studies, wrote the book, “The law that Never Was “. Bill and Beckman flew the to every state in this Nation and researched state archives and collected state ratification documents proving their case.
L.B. Bork. Constitutional Scholar. Author of the in-law expose of the red 14th amendment. 300 page breakdown on the 14th alone.
Ralph Borysyzewski; author, police officer. Authored ” The Constitution that never was.
Lysander Spooner; author NO TREASON.

Obama is wrong, the “scholars” provided by Jon Clausen, are wrong, as he himself is as well.Democracy=Socialism=Communism as history shows repeatedly are flawed. Check Athens Greece, Aesop, and history to date for your proofs.

Communism will never be the answers for what humanity needs, being slaves never was Gods intention for men, nor the founders intentions either. That said, both candidates are the same thing, as well as their parties.

Bea,
There’s a hell of a lot of difference between the neo-nazi skin heads and most of the guys on these pages. To compare me or most of the people to the neos is just plain ridiculous. I wonder how many people white,black or brown are voting Obama just because he’s black. I know of a few that are voting that way just to prove there not racist. It’s like it’s some big deal to vote for an African-American. It houdn’t be about skin color at all, it should be based solely on issues and what fit into the voters needs and wants. My wife and I both own our own businesses and work hard and I do not agree with handing out money to people that are to lazy to get a job or do not try to better themselves through hard work and dedication.

Obama,Biden,Reid,Pelosi = TROUBLE

Everyone gets so bent out of shape over who will be prez and it doesn’t make much difference in the long haul anyway — so we move it to the right with Reagan, we move it back with Obama to the left and end up somewhere in the middle — where it SHOULD BE.

The middle is the best.

Mike,

I agree with your statement that you work hard and don’t want to “hand” your money to lazy people.

But are ALL or even MOST of the people that need help “lazy?”

What about a man with a family who is the sole supporter, gets cancer, can’t work anymore, his family loses their house due to medical bills, their bills pile up, yadda, yadda, yadda……

I don’t see too many friends or relatives coming to these folks aid anymore these days. Do you? If so, that’s not the norm.

Those on the right like to say that “No govt program is as good as family and friends, (I agree but let’s get real) but I don’t know of too many people who are helping their family or neighbor out with the cost of health care or groceries! Do you?

The fact is we don’t live in an agricultural society anymore — where families stay together for generations — people on the far right like to pretend we still live like this — it’s a nice fantasy, but that’s all it is — a fantasy. It’s not “real life” anymore, right or wrong.

We (as taxpayers) can only deal with reality as it is now.

Should we just say “To hell with you; you don’t have any family or friends to help, why should taxpayers help you just because you got sick and lost your house? That’s your problem buddy!”

Yes I agree with everything you’re saying…. our society has a “I want it now and I will get it now” attitude, to hell with tomorrow!”

That irresponsiblity and wrecklessness has been aided and abetted by de-regulation and helped along in no small part by clever marketing people driven by greed and bottom line profits. Sell more X-boxes, sell more this, sell more that. That’s “capitalism.”

De-regulation and capitalism only works with MORAL AND RESPONSIBLE PEOPLE. Not Wall Street greedy types who brag about how “great” capitalism is when they’re screwing anyone they can.

But shi– happens.

People can get sick through no fault of their own — bad genes.

What then?

Just say screw ‘em?

What do you mean “help out?” Taxes? Or do you just hand your money to people who need it?

Most Americans don’t live in small communities anymore.

Of course there should not be policies to incent people to leech. Which programs are you speaking of that do this? What people are you speaking of that are “leeching?”

Welfare has gone to Welfare to Work.

Yes taxes. Why is Obama so savy because he comes from a big city and knows that some people use guns for killing people. Even though we don’t live in the city we still get the news and we can actually read and we know that guns are used the wrong way sometimes. Problem is that Obama feels that a homeowner in his own home should not own a gun for self-defense. That to me and many others is a problem. Also many of his views on gun control are way over the top.

I can change my mind given logical facts on most issues. Heck I used to be liberal.

You can’t trust PARENTS with guns either!

Allowing an 8 year to have access to a gun intended for WAR?

REAL WAR!

THIS IS NOT A GAME

GUNS ARE NOT TOYS FOR 8 YEAR OLDS!

GUNS ARE MEANT TO KILL.

THEY HAVE NO OTHER PURPOSE.

And to allow an 8 year old to handle a Uzi?!

Was this legal?!?!

If so, we have some serious problems with our gun laws.

You’re all freaking crazy if you think it is Ok to allow an 8 year old to handle a weapon of this magnitude!

GUNS ARE NOT TOYS

GUNS ARE NOT TOYS

Do you parents get it now? Or would you rather watch your son blow his head off too?

Outrageous irresponsibility.

The American Medical Industrial Complex kills 750,000 Americans by mistake per year. I say lets ban Doctors.

Alcohol kills 150,000 Americans per year.

Tobacco kills 340,000 to 450,000 Americans per year.

Aspirin, including deliberate overdose 180-1000 americans a year, some of them eight year old kids with a headache who dont know how many to take and over dose on them.

Caffeine kills 1,000 to 10,000 Americans per year.

Legal Prescription Drog over doses, deliberate or accidental and or in combination with alcohol kills 100,000+ Americans per year.

Illicit Drug over dose kills 3,800 to 5,200 Americans every year.

More kids drown annually in the swimming pools across America than die by accidental or intentional gun fire.

Buy a gun safe for your guns….Some idiot left his gun laying around for his kid to find and hurt himself with it, A terrible tragedy, I agree, reckless endangerment on the part of that person, NOT ME.

So leave my guns alone, BEATRICAL, who said in these pages ” Im not voting for either party because both are wrong for America” LIAR.

Want more factual stats ? I got them….Better ban doctors Lawyers, and political hacks because they cause deaths, dissention, division of their own country, and the MASS spreading of lies.

Now don’t you gotta go KISS your MESSIAHS feet or something.

Greg,

You are calling this an “accident?”

Are you freaking crazy?

Can you read?

The article was NOT about someone “accidentally” leaving their guns “around.”

An 8 year old boy was a gun show in Massachusetts and his dad was taking a picture of him firing a LOADED UZI!.

The boy (who should have been fishing or something else for God’s sakes) OBVIOUSLY was not TRAINED MILITARY.

He obviously could not handle the gun, it jerked, and ended up firing A ROUND IN HIS HEAD.

As the instructor and his own father stood there.

READ!

And you have the nerve to call this “ACCIDENTAL?”

This is WILLFUL NEGLECT ON ALL THE ADULTS INVOLVED.

Hardly an “ACCIDENT.”

What kind of idiots would allow an 8 year old to handle a LOADED UZI? It’s not a TOY!

LOADED UZI

LOADED UZI

LOADED UZI

You have just proven that you are an extremist.

All adults involved in this should go to jail for life and throw away the key.

There is no excuse to kill children like this.

http://news.aol.com/article/boy-8-killed-in-gun-show-accident/226339?icid=100214839×1212205520×1200779520

HARDLY AN “ACCIDENT!!!”

Willful disregard for military weapons allowing an 8 year to play with them as if they were TOYS.

GUNS ARE NOT TOYS FOR CHILDREN!

The stupidest thing I ever heard of, setting up an full auto booth for the general populance to try one out if they desire to do so. The gun owner is more responsible for this than the father, both are fools though. I can’t understand this, I have been around nine mil UZI’s, I can’t believe no one stepped up and said wait a minute here, that gun can get away from a man who never used it before. I would have never stood near this exhibition, PERIOD. Full Auto is serious stuff. Training/Pratice weapons ONLY. SAD.

Blaming responsible people at this board is still irresponsible BEA, and blaming us, for the actions of an idiot as well…..Be like blaming you for the death of that Grizzly what ate Timothy Treadwell. Which was shot dead by park rangers the next day.

You know what is weird, the father on the video isn’t even crying, I would not even be able to talk after this. That has to be most costly error in judgement Ive ever seen.

Tom, you are honestly comparing a piece of CANDY with A SUBMACHINE GUN?

You can look at someone in the eye and compare those two items? One meant to eat, the other intended for war and the military?

A fully loaded UZI in the hands of an 8 year old?

You just proved your extremist position about guns.

Tom, you’re right — I should just listen to those intelligent people who who think guns are good in the hands of babies — I mean, yea, sure, they’re dangerous, but so what? I mean, the kid should have known better! Gee whiz.

In fact, why stop there?

I think ALL 8 year old boys should be REQUIRED to learn how to shoot uzi’s in case they need to someday help their dads revolt against the U.S. military — I mean, we need to level the playing field.

And heck, why bother with camping, fishing and hiking with your kids? Why not spend your weekends learning how to fire uzi’s properly (This one was an Israeli type for military purpose). In fact, why not start them at 5 years old? Why wait until they’re 8?

You’re absolutely right. What was I thinking? How silly of me.

His dad deserves to burn in hell, along with all those abortion doctors you all want dead too, right?

Bea

Why not get your kids Christmas gifts early!

The Uzi is a 50-year-old weapon once used by the Israeli infantry and later adapted for use by commandos and secret service agencies around the world because it can be used in close quarters to fire rapidly.

The Micro-Uzi, a smaller version of the original weapon, weighs 4.5 pounds and can fire 20 rounds per second. An Uzi has more recoil than a handgun but less than an assault rifle such as an M-16. Recoil — the backward motion of a weapon after it’s fired — is greater for guns that fire rapidly and use larger caliber shells.

“It’s very difficult to control,” said Greenleaf, who did not attend the gun expo and said it was the club’s first death. “We’re lucky the gun went up instead of sideways. If it went sideways, we might have had 10 dead people.”

********

How about some friggin’ sympathy for women who were raped or victims of incest? Palin would like to force them to carry the baby.

Dangerous extremists!

In complete seriousness, why not let our young children do whatever the hell they want– smoke, drink, have sex, whatever they want? Why should they have to wait to smoke but not to fire a military assault weapon?
*****************************
from another gun blog:

While many of us are still cleaning up after the mess left behind from the lack of government oversight of our country’s financial system, the shooting death of an 8-year- old boy with an Uzi is further evidence as to why government regulation can be a very good thing.

Over the weekend, 8-year-old Christopher Bizilj and his father were participating in the Westfield Sportsman’s Club Machine Gun Shoot in western Massachusetts. The event organizers boasted in an advertisement that the $5 entry fee was waived for children under age 16 and there was “no age limit or licenses required to shoot machine guns.”

At the event, Christopher was firing a 9-mm Micro Uzi machine gun, a fully automatic weapon, when he lost control of the weapon and shot himself in the head.

What was an 8-year-old doing with an Uzi you might ask? Well, believe it or not, it may be legal in the state of Massachusetts.

According to Westfield police, Massachusetts law allows anyone under age 18 to fire an automatic weapon as long as they have parental consent and a licensed instructor at the ready. If this is true, you could have brought your 4-, 5-, 6- or 7- year old along as well. If the child was big enough to stand, then he would have been man enough to shoot an Uzi.

In hindsight, one would think that the Sportsman’s Club management team would be concerned about liability issues and would prohibit such wanton and reckless promotion.

One would also think that the certified instructor that accompanied the 8-year-old would think perhaps this is not such a good idea for a young boy to be handling such a powerful weapon. Or, one would think that the dozens or hundreds of other parents attending the event would have had the maturity and judgement to prevent their own children from participating in such an event.

You see dozens of adults failed Christopher Bizilj on that day. The owners of the club, the certified instructors, the other adults in attendance and inconceivably even his own father.

If adults cannot be trusted to have sound and good judgment where the issue of children and guns is concerned then one could easily argue that it makes sense for the government to intervene on their behalf. We are a great nation but to truly be worthy of that distinction means that we must protect and care for our our most vulnerable, which in this case are children.

At Freedom States Alliance, we support an outright ban on all automatic weapons for civilian use, however, until this larger goal is reached, the age limit for the shooting of any automatic weapon should be immediately raised to 18 years old nationally. No exceptions.

We don’t allow children to drink or even vote before then. So why on earth are we allowing 8-year-olds to shoot machine guns?

It.

Liberals generally don’t like guns unless used for hunting only.

Again, why not let children smoke and drink and drive too? Oh, because allowing them to DRIVE might be dangerous?????

Shit, if they can use uzi’s legally, why not do whatever they want?

Barack Obama’s Dream Cabinet:

Secretary of Agriculture — U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin a far-left Iowa Democrat who has served as chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, has never met an ag subsidy he didn’t love.

Attorney General — U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy of the Peoples’ Republic of Vermont would be equally vigilant on behalf of the rights of criminals and would therefore be a suitable second choice.

Secretary of Defense — U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio once proposed a “Department of Peace”? (What Dennis the Menace has never understood is that the funny-looking five-sided building across the Potomac is our department of peace.)

Secretary of Education — The obvious choice for this post is Professor William Ayers. This man is considered to be an expert in the field of education. He has written 17 books and is highly respected within the academic community. He is well known to Barack Obama, having served on at least two boards with him. He is also a self-proclaimed Marxist, anarchist and domestic terrorist who brags about having set off bombs at the Pentagon, the U.S. Capitol building and at New York City police headquarters. He and Barack Obama share a desire to pollute young American minds with leftist propaganda.

Secretary of Energy — Perhaps President Obama could get former Vice President Al Gore to fill this important post. Gore could just shut down what’s left of our refineries and grind the nation to a halt.

Secretary of Health and Human Services — Is Jack Kevorkian still alive? Old Jack really would be perfect to carry out Obama’s creepy anti-life policies.

Secretary of Homeland Security — As long as we have Bill Ayers in the cabinet, why not include his lovely wife, Bernadine Dohrn? Another domestic terrorist, Dohrn actually did prison time for her crimes.

Secretary of State — Without question, the state department is the most visible cabinet post in any administration, and no one personifies Barack Obama’s view of American foreign policy better than Noam Chomsky. Chomsky is widely known as a political dissident, anarchist and socialist intellectual. Chomsky has established himself as a harsh critic of American foreign policy. He would be the perfect secretary of state to carry out Barack Obama’s feeble foreign policy initiatives.

Secretary of the Treasury — why wouldn’t Obama offer the job to the crazy, Hungarian-born billionaire who has invested so much in getting him elected? George Soros

For White House Budget Director, a tough choice between two highly qualified members of the U.S. House of Representatives, namely Charlie Rangel and Barney Frank. Rangel once equated tax cuts with racism. His appointment would fill a race quota. Then there’s Frank, of Massachusetts, who was at the heart of the debacle with sub-prime mortgages. His presence in an Obama administration would fill a gay quota. (Appearances are everything to Dems, you know.)

Then there are the eventual Supreme Court appointments, but I can’t even allow myself to focus on any names beyond Hillary Clinton. Who knows? Obama might even get this motley crew approved by a Democrat Senate.

Is this the DANGEROUS EXTREMISTS your referring too?

Lack of proper education around dangerous guns. Too bad it happened.

If these Raped women had a well trained sense of self defense, were allowed carry permits, spent time at the range to practice and sharpen their skills. well? might be the outcome would be different.

The NRA offers courses to women REFUSE TO BE A VICTIM.

http://www.nrahq.org/RTBAV/

Their Eddie Eagle program teaches fundamental gun awareness to grade school children You can never have enough safety education when it comes to handling “Dangerous” Guns

The purpose of the Eddie Eagle Program isn’t to teach whether guns are good or bad, but rather to promote the protection and safety of children. The program makes no value judgments about firearms, and no firearms are ever used in the program. Like swimming pools, electrical outlets, matchbooks and household poison, they’re treated simply as a fact of everyday life. With firearms found in about half of all American households, it’s a stance that makes sense.

http://www.nrahq.org/safety/eddie/

II started shooting with my dad when I was 5, I taught 3 of my boys to shoot and handle a gun at the same age. My youngest boy is 15 nw and I trust him more with a gun than a lot of adults I’ve seen in the field or at the range. He goes elk and deer hunting by himself and with a couple of his friends that have also been taught the proper safety precautions of handling a weapon. This boy geting killed should of never happened and it’s a great tragedy. I can’t believe that there wasn’t more supervision in the area and maybe a seperate booth for children with 22 cal. shooting. An 8 year old shouldn’ be handling an automatic weapon, probably alot of adults that shouldn’t either. What a waste.

His father was head of the emergency medical dept. at Johnson Memorial Hospital, that is even more shocking.

His responses to interviews were strange — he was detached. Who could even interview then?

I think he’s fu–ed up in the head.

All web pages for Westfield Sportsman Club are shut down. I found reference to the shoot on a “Local” site Seems like this was an “event” not approached in the proper way.

Saturday and Sunday is also the annual public machine gun shoot at the Westfield Sportsman’s Club on Furrowtown Road up past Westfield High School. It’s a great chance to come out and shoot, in safe and controlled conditions, many of the machine guns you may only have read about in history books, seen on the History Channel, or in Hollywood movies.

Yep to bad so sad. Four children die per day in the U.S due to parental neglect and abuse. This gets neglect to protect in my book.

A great source of gun facts;
http://www.gunfacts.info/

http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts5-0-print.pdf

In 1929, the Soviet Union under its Socialist Liberalist Communist Regime established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. This dosen’t include the 30 million Socialist Liberalist Communist Uncle Joe Stalin, starved to death in the Ukraine.

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, about 20 million Armenians, unable to defend themsleves were rounded up and exterminated.

Germany under Hitler, who Californias Governor likes, and Obama sets his own examples after, copy cat dictator if you will, established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, leaving a populace unable to defend itself against Gestapo and SS. hundreds of thousands died as a result.

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Guatelemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 1611KJV Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, 1-2 million educated people unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control; 56 million at a bare minimum.

Thank God some folks escaped to record these events other wise we would give up our guns and our rights because stupid morons like BEATRICAL don’t care or get it at all.

I can keep going with this Bea, or you can go away and shut the f%$# up.

I think you made enough HAY on the sad death of an eight year old child by accident, carelessness on the part of others, Neglect, stupidity, on the behalf of others. Go bitch at them.

Yes sir, right here:

After Aussies surrendered 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own government, a program costing Aussie Tax-payers $500 million for the first year; and those brilliant Socialist Liberalist results were a 3.2 percent hike in HOMICIDES. 8.6 percent hike in ASSAULTS, Austraila nation wide armed robberies went up 44 percent, THAT WAS 44 PERCENT.

In Victoria alone homocides with fire arms are up 300 PERCENT. So the law abiders who turned in the guns are prey to the criminals who did not. SOCIALISM FOR YA. Kill and rape and plunder the honest folks.

VOTE OBAMA. I hit England later, and then Canada….

Bea,

MYTH; Stricter Gun Control Laws Could Have prevented The Columbine Massacre,

FACT, Harris and Klebold violated clost to 20 forearms laws in obtaining weapons. Would 21 laws really have made a difference? The two shotguns and one rifle used by Harris and Klebold were purchased by a girl friend who passed a background check, and the TEC-9 handgun was already banned.

It is illegal for the girl to buy the gun and give it to criminals or underage kids, which she did.

FACT, this socialized Rockefeller created via Registered Communist John Dewey, School system in America is the failure. Give kids real books, real history, real Constitutional instruction, Real Bill Of Rights instruction, Teach them the value of life, stop government drugs.
http://www.jpfo.org

Science fiction eh ? Was Hitler science fiction. Why would a U.S. Senator in 1968 be vitally interested in the structure and contents of a NAZI law of 1938 ?

That Nazi law, became our Gun Control Act of 1968, the proof is in the Library of Congress, and in a book provided at the link provided. Gun Control, Gateway to Tyranny shows the Nazi-GCA-68 connection by giving the full text of the laws in German and english, along with various enabling acts and pointing out parallels.

Many Germans prior to those exterminations said the same thing as you, IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN HERE. Your not a fool, your very blind, and blind faith is for the weak.

Once again-LIBRARY OF CONGRESS RECORDS support my beliefs. I know when an enemy is telegraphing its intents.

Thank you U.S. Senator Thomas Dodd, for leaving the trail of your deciet. Dodd served at the Nuremburg trials of Nazi War Criminals, he liked the German control laws of 1938 so well, he made them our Gun control act of 1968. Those laws in Germany led to confiscations and exterminations.

Many genocide survivors interviewed now believe gun control laws an ADVANCE WARNING of whats to come. And historical events prove it.

Better schools with better information for learning is the answer. Not dumb socialist concepts and Assumptions to live by as you provide every time you touch that keyboard.

You trust your government that holds yer hand, I will trust myself I am my own government, I am my own man. My King is not of this earth.

You would ‘investigate’ all connections to me? Why, who do you think I’m “connected” with? This should be interesting………

Wow — if that doesn’t sound like either major paranoia, or something illegal, or Big Brother — I don’t know what does.

Chill out — you’re like a very tightly wound toy ready to spring all the time. Maybe it’s YOU that needs investigating!

I just did a google search on “Greg Farber” if that’s his real name — quite hostile — scary dude for sure…

Greg Farber 03/30/08 – 09:58The Law Enforcement Agency called it a justified self defence kill of the warm springs wolf. Tracks on the ground indicated an attack stance and lunge of the dead wolf thus no charges were filed against this hunter. Tracks of the other two wolves were around the man as well. This went on for some minutes and finally the fellow dropped the Alpha. The only Advise I give folks is dont run. stand your ground. Your lack of Knowledge concerning how the wolf prey tests and learns about new prey is reckless. I see too that defending ones life gets one in the Elmer Fudd categorization, what does that make you, you hide behind a fake name to protect your self from some whack job, I post mine so the whack job will attempt too mess with me then I can get the whack job off the street and in a cell. Those government FWS biologists were pinned up on a boulder and were about to become dinner, thus the rescue. I await more of your lame excuses. I hope too some day be SUPER INTELLIGENT as your self, then who knows I can join your hiking club. giggle.

Reply to Lynne Stone
Slow-elk Poacher 03/30/08 – 10:29Animals aren’t clueless. Every year, hunters around Yellowstone get mauled by Grizzlies. And if you notice the stats, more people are mauled with guns in their hands, than those that don’t have weapons. Thats because Grizzlies know when their lives are threatened. Some idiot with a bow pointed at a wolf… you bet the wolf knows his life is under threat, so he has the choice of fight or flee. I personally, don’t know the situation, of what happened here, and I never saw it in the papers, so maybe you can point to the article. Once again, there are two sides to a story. Just because the wolf can’t speak redneck, doesn’t mean it doesn’t have intelligence, and doesn’t understand when it’s life is threatened.

Reply to
Slow-elk Poacher 03/28/08 – 19:09Do you ever notice that all your propaganda that you supply about wolves never really has any REAL documented evidence about how vicious wolves are as killers. It’s equivalent to you running out with a pair of binoculars down muldoon and saying “all the elk are gone”, cause when I drove my 4 wheeler down I didn’t spot any (huh, ever consider that maybe Elk might just be a little higher in IQ, than you and your type). All these funny little sites ever show are pics of dead deer (yeah, Wolves do eat deer, just like you). Yet, almost all of your links are simplistic fearmongering BS, straight out of the book of Karl Rove, but done by his backwoods dumb brother jimbob jones. I love all the crappy youtube videos as TRUE DOCUMENTED AND ULTIMATE AUTHORITATIVE TRUTH that wolves are gonna eat you. Funny stuff. You’re a real hoot. Yep, those are real proof.

Either way, Ronnie Gillett doesn’t put me in the mind of a very web savy individual, let alone anyone smart enough to utilize media to his advantage. Only morons, local environmentalists, and ranchers know anything about the idiot and his moronic pro-profit anti-wulfy agendas. Most of the time the only way he ever gets any attention is because of his encounters with Lynne. If she never mentioned him, and his little bizarre obsession with her, no one would even know that Idaho’s dumbest resident located in Stanley Idaho even exists (of course, you might take second place in the Gomer Pyle parade).

Either way, I think Jane Goodall would find the two of you utterly fascinating. She could probably do an entire national geographic special on endangered native dimwitted white european Idahoans, and their struggle to learn how to spell, as they howl in the wind against the ferocious menacing big bad wolves.

Reply to
Greg Farber 03/28/08 – 20:40I just noticed how bad a mood it puts you in and so Im just gonna keep on comin dude, your retarded name calling is so great and I really need to laugh my but off at your paranoid self and your delusional hatred. By golly at least we agree Gillette is an Oaf. And I thank you kindly placin me second an all but that means your third.

Sorry to get ya all excited their Pilgrim but we got no four wheelers around this place, but if its any consolation I shot me one of them thar things before, hate them four wheeler buggy contraptions, know wut I mean hater dude. If you think going after Criminal Karl Rove Nazi Republowpuke is gonna get me all convoluted up in the head well that was a wasted effort smart boy. I was in my home Town yesterday and saw 824 elk in one place, about as many down the drainage again some 45 miles further. Still not enough yearlings.

You can not anger me or get under my skin so get over it. But I bet you could do some stand-up comedy instead of writing bad articles. And sides buddy who tought you to spell anyhow, English only has seven meanings and several different spellings too. If you folks at the Express are gonna Ban me well then just do it cause I am not gonna scream and rant and call names like you do. Your just a twit any way. And your also a minority in Idaho.

I think Gillette is controled opposame, He gave himself a black-eye not me. His stupid petition even if it passes will accomplish nothing. I also do not understand why FWS, IFG, and the Advocate groups did not make it a felony too poach a wolf even after today, thus those people you compare me too, even though they are rare will think twice before killing wolves out of season, or during season, for example wacking one, and if no body is around bury it, and wack another, I have complained to IFG for years to make it a felony to poach big game. I think this would help our herds and wolves.

Some idiots will blow this de-list any how, either poachers, or suits filed or both. And the big game in my humble opinion still will suffer.

Reply to
Slow-elk Poacher 03/28/08 – 21:27I don’t work for the express, yahoo. So, who is the paranoid one, again? I’m just stating that your consistent usage of simplistic bobs homepages as verified proof of the danger of wolves is nothing more than simplistic propaganda, at best. You have yet to really supply any real scientific convincing data, or information that isn’t anything more than simplistic fearmongering. Like I said, it’s like a page straight out of the book of Karl Rove.

You do realize elk numbers change year in and year out. It’s not ever linear. Herds migrate, and move, and where they are one year, isn’t necessarily where they will be next year. Heck, a herd could move over to Montana, or be in the Smoky’s during the summer one year, and migrate over to the Beaverheads the next. The reasons could be vast, but usually the biggest reason is snowpack, which of course we had a harsh one this year. Recently, a giant herd of over a few thousand elk was hanging outside of Mountain Home right off the freeway. Usually, they don’t converge in such high numbers, but probably due to the harsh winter, they migrated to the open feeding grounds where they could forage. Yeah, there were probably a few wolves that followed along, but that’s the natural cycle of life. Either way, i’ll take scientific aerial survey numbers, and fish and game data over your head counting, anyday.

Reply to
Greg Farber 03/29/08 – 07:22I will keep an open mind and see ALL the evidence, people can go to those web sites and come too to their own conclusions. I deal with people like you all the time. You have walls built into your mind, fire walls if you will. Jim Beers, is a retired FWS biologist, he makes a lot of sense to me. I have friends in IFG, and they are of the same opinion as I, but dare not come out in fear of job loss. Will Graves also is the author of Wolves In Russia, Will did a study in Russia about wolves. It is my opinion folks should read Wills book. ISBN 978-55059-332-7. They then can use their own minds to decide the evidence.

If your side of the issue is right then I say to you bring forth all this grass roots evidence, bring forth all these web sites, books, eye wittness accounts on the ground, let us put all the evidence on the table and then people can make up their own opinions. The re-wilding project is real, the UN charter of agenda 21 is real, after the thinkers like myself are defeated and forced off the lands, your next. you will move too, you will have no choices either.

Whoopee, there are 1000-1200 elk across the enterstate by Mountain Home, there should be 10,000. Have you been there? have you counted yearlings? Bulls? I will take the words of myself, other people on the ground, the Idaho Sportsmans Association whom just flew the Clear Water some weeks back, the Selway, the LO-LO and they then asked Idaho Fish and Game to show them the elk they claim still are high in numbers and are just fine, the cow too calf ratio is less than 30% statewide, their own biologists reports, I still look at FWS,IFG for evidence too, and we are still waiting for that evidence to prove out, thus I watch these Starving for FUNDS agency’s lying to cover their buts with a vey wary eye.

1992-1996-1997 we had more snow than this, the Elk did not cross the Interstate, Those Elk are down there now because they can see the wolves comin and they can run from then down there, elk and wolves do not mix in deep snows, the wolf wins every time. Perhaps the elk have caught onto the ancient migrations of old, because elk are originally a plains animal. In the deep snows wolves kill every elk they can because they can do it, this MYTH of wolves only taking the weak has been defeated with hard evidence, the factor is the snows of winter.

I’m a sheds hunter of 30 years, in 1995 Blacks Creek to mountain home had 10,000 elk wintering across there, now you admit there are 1000 elk. My point exactly. From Crouch to Canyon creek there were in 1992 8,500 elk, in 1995 there were 8,500 elk, that is 70+ miles of drainage, I have counted less than 1000 elk at lowman. another 1000 elk at Crouch. The Middle Fork Boise is the same story, I have drove this road from Lucky Peak to Atlanta four times. The Cottonwood Herd should be 8000 elk at that lower end of the drainage. I still have not found 1000 elk in this drainage, and there is no place else for them to be. Snow would keep them down low, I never had problems finding these herds over the years, where are they? scat, thats where.

While doing all this name calling and attempting to discredit I notice all you have apparently done is looked up government numbers and that is sufficiant for your mind, well not mine. The decimation and unbalance has been evident since 1999, thus I have put the bow up, and left those elk alone. I still pack in though, I ride that horse in the Wilderness a ton, I got one horse standing here who has done over 10,000 miles of wilderness alone. Maybe thats why I never ran into miss Stoned before. I was in the woods while she was arguing with people in Stanely.

I will keep seeking truth, I will not fold my mind and shut it down on the hopes big brother must be honest and just recklessly trust him like you have done, probably for an entire life time. FWS IFG are looking out for number one, and it is not me, and people like you help them do it. its called the blind leading the blind. Well Buddy my eyes are wide open.

Reply to
Slow-elk Poacher 03/29/08 – 08:59Greg,

Something tells me that you can’t even count the 10 fingers on your hand, let alone 784. Yeah, somehow I don’t believe anything you say. You’re just a simplistic redneck propagandist. Let’s see these numbers from the sportsman association, once again that are probably filled with rednecks that dropped out of school in the first grade, and can’t count past 3. THE END. Now, go away, moron. I DON’T GIVE ONE FLYING CRAP ABOUT YOUR IDIOTIC BACKGROUND, and lack of a good formal education. You probably dropped out of Wood River or finished at the bottom of the class. You’re words are hollow and empty, like your head. I also think you are full of shit.

Reply to
Slow-elk Poacher 03/29/08 – 09:05Secondly, moron. Next time you’re out in the field. Document it with video. Your words are empty and hollow until you do. Just like the sportsmans association. Bring on the documented evidence, not this “Well, I could prove it, but they fear losing their jobs”. . that’s not proof of anything, except that you are trying to lie your dumass through this thread.

Damn, is this valley filled with more idiots than it needs.

Reply to
Greg Farber 03/29/08 – 09:55Well now a fair and balanced evidentiary official debate seems to anger you, ha ha. Why all the emotional tirades, afraid of a little truth are you ? I think so. I do not even need to break a sweat too thump you with truth. Some 1st grade drop outs whom could be Red necks Flew this airplane successfully and here is some video, http://www.youtube.com I have provided you video and documentation, you have failed to look at it at all, in the short time of these comments it would be impossible for you too have done so.

I find it very funny that you a nobody can break every rule of this blog and comment site, yet you are still allowed to persist in your slanderous personal attacks, filthy language (profanity) Libelous and bordering racist and prejuidicial remarks, yet you are still allowed to comment here, I must presume the author of this thread approves of this nonsense on his blog. Even though I feel this way, I shall respect this mans blog entry with honesty, Integrity, and polite comments, thank goodness, I did not graduate from your mind controled school of Dis-respect.

Yes. you hate opposing views don’t you? your ilk want it all your way or nothing. well buddy I’m here too stay. We the real people of Idaho see you and we watch you every day. Funny thing is we are not the ones attempting to stop you from your life styles, yet you want too ruin ours with lies.

Rights are not gifts from one man to another, nor from one class of men too another, it is impossible to discover any origin of rights otherwise than in the origin of man, it consequently follows that rights appertain to man in right of his existence, and must therefore be equal to every man, (Paine) and you would do well to learn it!!

You have been out classed and even could do with some anger managment.
PEACE.

Reply to
The Redneck Bastard Son 03/29/08 – 14:08Wow, that video showed all the complete evidence, we need. Also, don’t forget Greg, that the big brother government didn’t just bring in Canadian wolves. They brought in genetically modified super wolves that were manufactured deep in a secret government lab. Their strain has a habit of being able to devour elk at 10 times the rate of normal canadian wolves.

Reply to
Greg Farber 03/29/08 – 17:29To redneck poachers son and hater of reality.

Super wolves or hybrids, did you forget grasshopper we had some hybrids killed in the valley not to long ago. Did you not do your homework again little bright boy ? Did you fail too learn that FWS is and has been experimenting with wolf and dog mixed crosses. Oh they are !! And even the wolves that breed coyotes or dogs then this hybrid is protected, so regardless whether or not the gove is playing around in the laboratory we still got hybrids and they are nothing but trouble. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov And also FWS admits it has released cage raised wolves. Well cage raised wolves are habituated wolves.

Now keep your stupid arse out of the forests so the wolfie can live in peace and not become habituated to you and then make a meal of you or some other dumdum like you. Now I gotta go oil up my automatic .308 silenced super duty mean an nasty big bad ole gun.

Reply to
Greg Farber 03/30/08 – 09:18The definition in the FWS document you should read is definition #16

The term “species” includes any subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants, and distinct population segment of any species or vertabrae or wild life which interbreeds when mature.

So some call Hybrids Super wolves due too being more aggressive than real wolves themselves, having raised a real wolf and watched the Red Mountain Pack from 1972 till 1998 I was concerned with unusual hunt/kill tactics and decided too research further FWS studies to understand better sport and practice kills by wolves.

True Idahoan 03/28/08 – 12:28Slow-elk Poacher, the arrogance of your comments make it pretty clear that you think you are better than hunters, ranchers, right-wingers, and probably anyone else that thinks or acts differently than you. You need to realize that in the grand scheme of things the earth was created for man, by God. Granted this doesn’t excuse us for misuse. But, is hunting or ranching really misuse if done properly? No! In your mind the fact that the practices exist is likely misuse. But the fact that you are arrogant troubles me, but I still think you have a right to exist, have an opinion, and climb all your happy little mountains. Get down off your high horse (or mountain in your case) and accept that people are and will always be different than you. And that is a good thing. And let me just reemphasize that God is in control! Not you, the left-wingers, right-wingers, hunters, etc… Someday we are all going to be really surprised by how true that is, so we may want to put aside our pride and learn to co-exist. After all isn’t that what you want the elk and wolves to do?

Reply to True Idahoan
Slow-elk Poacher 03/28/08 – 12:55Ohh please. This earth was not created for man, you dummy. I guess, you also believe that a man and woman was also created in a garden, on the seventh day. Anyway, with those comments, I really have nothing more to say, except that maybe you and some taliban extremists should get together and kick it with some beers. Good luck, and godspeed.

Reply to True Idahoan
True Idahoan 03/28/08 – 13:06I rest my case! Boy are you gonna be surprised!

Reply to True Idahoan
grownup 03/28/08 – 15:42Please, let’s try to stick to facts and leave the invisible man in the sky out of it. Thanks.

widlife lover 03/28/08 – 11:541st point

Ron Gillette has a well known history of losing his cool about wolves and wolf supporters. Lynne may be experienced at using the media to educate people (it is her job) but she does not have a history of physically abusive behavior towards others. Lynne had every right to take pictures along a public right of way and Ron had no right to physically attack her or attempt to take her camera.

2nd point

Ron Gillete also subscribes to this “exotic species” argument I see a few people using here in this blog (calling them Canadian wolves). It is pretty ironic for white european people to be calling north american wolves an “exotic species”.

3rd point

Elk populations in and around Lowman (where I live) remain high despite 3 wolf packs known to be in the area. In the upper East fork of the Salmon where wildlife services have just been killing wolves for agricultural conflict there is an annual cow elk hunt to reduce elk populations because of rancher complaints. They give out over 300 tags each year in the upper reaches of this drainage. Maybe that’s what happened to all Ron’s elk.

Reply to widlife lover
Greg Farber 03/28/08 – 12:40I agree Ron gets too emotional. But too convict him because you disagree with him is not Right. Thank goodness we have an evidentiary process and jury system so as too keep it honest. If this got the better of him then he had better retire and go away. I personally do not trust either of these too clowns.

Reply to widlife lover
Slow-elk Poacher 03/28/08 – 15:04Hey, don’t tell the world that there are elk in Lowman, even if you live there. Greg said they are heading towards extinction, and you just have to trust his words 100%. He gave official numbers on it from his own two eyes, to prove that he’s right. And if you say or think otherwise, then you ain’t seeing the truth. Don’t be cooking the books, with unfactual info like the IF&G do. It’s all a big conspiracy to make money, and they want the elk pushed towards extinction. After the elk are gone, they’ll then start eating you and your family in the dead of night while your sleeping. So, you might want to start sleeping with at least a high caliber fully automatic weapon next to you, just in case of a pack of 20 bust through your door.

Reply to widlife lover
Greg Farber 03/30/08 – 09:24No one can be 100% accurate, I never claimed to be either. But you seem to think FWS is 100% honest accurate and forthright. what are you a blind stooge.

Reply to widlife lover
Jeanne Drewrey 05/04/08 – 12:48Say it again, Wildlife Lover!! You’re RIGHT ON!!!!!!

Native Idahoan – Stanley, ID. 03/28/08 – 11:18Last summer some friends were target practicing at the gravel pit near Stanley, which is legal. Lynn Stone approached them and screamed at them for “shooting at wolves. That is not at all what they were doing and they thought she was a bonafied nut case. It’s our opinion that nearly all wolf advocates are screamers and like to hurl personal insults to those that do not agree with them. We have watched Ms Stone in the news for years. She seems to crave and love media attention and knows how to get it.

Bill 03/28/08 – 11:04Maybe they could remake “Dumb and Dumber” starring these two…

Slow-elk Poacher 03/28/08 – 08:59Typical nature of ultra right wing conservatives, like this baffoon. What a big man he is..threatening women with violence. Typical of the half-breed brain of an extreme righty.

I guarantee if it was a man, that Gillette wouldn’t even say anything, because he would get the crap beat out of him. Hopefully, they throw the book at him.

Reply to Slow-elk Poacher
Greg Farber 03/28/08 – 09:57LMAO, right bright one, all those missing elk are up in the DEEP SNOWS HIDING FROM ME at those mountain tops and back ridges. They must have moved under the snows too hide right. LOL. I was just on top of Cobb a week ago, and Baker Peak two weeks ago, saw a goat, saw a lot of snow, didnt sse no elk though LOL. Your so tough, well lets go do Glasford Peak hot rod, lets see what ya your made of. This hunter will shoe in there and board it soon, coming? Im in the book. bring your own back pack toughy.

Reply to Slow-elk Poacher
Slow-elk Poacher 03/28/08 – 10:28I’ve been on many peaks in Idaho.. you’re point?

Reply to Slow-elk Poacher
Greg Farber 03/28/08 – 12:05My point being your remarks that hunters are too lazy too get into the back country where elk have moved to in summer. I thought perhaps a hike with a lunatic hunter whom has traveled every trail, been to every peak, and lake in the Sawtooths/ Poineers/ Boulders might be an eye opening experiance for you. Might even shock you too see me the idiotic lunatic hunter standing beside you at the peak. Elk have Dwindled in 12 years. It is not nonsense. It is fact. I am not an idiot, or public enemy number one as you claim. I am a freeborn spiritual being of balance period. I’m neither this nor that bunkum except truth and the search of it. You should forget all the bunkum slave sheeple talk, all the demonization and childish name calling, and be the Sheperd of your self.

As I said before one of these two people Gillette/Stone is lying. or even both are. And both deserve the idiot status you so willingly sling around. Both are incorrect in their beliefs, Both give each others own side of this issue a bad name. I shall not pass judgement on them or you as you have done to me and others unfairly. I can prove elk populations have fallen encredibly in 12 years. Can you prove otherwise?

I called you out, lets go hike across the sawtooths by hating me, you hate yourself. I just traveled too several winter ranges in Idaho and Wyoming too look at herds of elk and cow too calf ratios while those herds are off the mountains. Too claim that people on the ground sharing what they have seen is idiotic and lies is laughable. Your comments and others comments here are vicious and I think you people would like too see those whom see things different than youreslves dead. What are you guys echo terrorists because you sound like it. Just go read you own comments.

I hunt/hike/bike/board/ski/horse backer/backpacker/photograhper/rawfoodist/herbalist/hempadvocate/fisher of fish and men. Do I sound so terrible? I go too gun shows, I collect art, I dig roots, I am Idaho, I was born and raised in a log cabin and my momma cooked on a woodstove, do you hate me? I lived in this state 49 years now, before you folks arrived it was lusher, greener, more wild, less poop off of the trails/under rocks with paper poking out from under the rock, I was packing out my doo doo 30 years ago, were you ? do you still want too call me idiot? I just yesterday counted 824 elk at Lowman, some yearlings, no calves, few bulls, in 1995 there were 5000 elk in that drainage, would you like too go see them ?

Would you like too solve our common problems with some of these issues and be a team, or do you still want too call me idiot, or liar. or worse. I would help you because you are a human, but I suspect you would laugh at me and turn my hand away. Funny isn’t it, somebody like me offering somebody like you my hand in friendship. I hope you can get over that dishonest hatred of people whom you never knew.

Leave a Comment
* Your name
* Your email (not shown)
Your website (optional)
Your City, St. (optional)
Remember me

Subscribe to comments ? Email replies to my comment only ?

Do you feel better informed this election year than before?
Yes
No

——————————————————————————–
Produced & Maintained by Idaho Mountain Express
P.O. Box 1013
Ketchum, ID 83340-1013
208.726.8060 Voice
208.726.2329 Fax
Copyright © 2008
Express Publishing Inc .
All Rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission of Express Publishing Inc. is prohibited.
The Idaho Mountain Express is distributed free to residents and guests throughout the Sun Valley, Idaho resort area community. Subscribers to the Idaho Mountain Express will read these stories and others in this week’s issue.

You HAVE banned by blogs before Greg, for obvious reasons.

What Congressional Globe are you quoting ? Or was that a Court case ? Could I get that reference from that law book your reading again ?

What are saying in reply 81 ?

I have never been banned any where. I do delete stupid comments at the blogs you either failed to find or avoided them because REAL NAMES and REAL E-MAILS are required.

I do to change my mind all the time, based on facts, It appears I will change my opinion on the location of Barack Obama’a location of Birth, see it here:

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

My sources are often correct…once in a while we make a mistake and correct it. As you can see above. That said Barack Obama is still a communist Liberal. LOL….

I could care less who or what you like.

True, I had forgotten that Jes, until I watched Bergs YouTubes again, I didn’t connect that this was the birth document he is pointing too, It sure do look shiny new too. It appears appearances appearing false once again he is a KENYAN.

There is no way I will post my real name on any blogs ever again due to an incident that happened a few years ago where I had to have the sherrif out to my house and file harrassment charges. Can’t and won’t do it.

Neither can they accept responsibility for their own mistakes…they want to blame someone else..(never themselves)

Tom Remington said “I am completely outraged and anyone else who is not after listening to the two YouTube clips that follow, I dare say are not American and/or has absolutely no understanding of the history of this great nation.” Sorry, but I have to disagree. I am American and I have a fairly good grasp of American history. Do you really believe that Barack Obama does not know American history? Did you check the source? It was taken out of context. I did not take the time to check up on the second video.

Jon Clausen Says: “I, for one, would like to have a President who has spent a fair amount of time analyzing the constitution and values it greatly – even if I disagree with him on nuances of it’s interpretation – rather than one who simply uses it to pander.” He does list sources. Well said, Jon, thanks!

Greg F. in response to your 2008-08-22 boise wolf party you have said ”got my eye on a big ole boy must be 150 pounds, look good stretched out on my wall”; at other times that the reintroduced wolves were larger, and that at one time you had raised a native male wolf with a weight of 115 pounds. You just said that “I do to change my mind all the time, based on facts”. Here are some facts. The first wolves reintroduced into Idaho in 1995 came from SW Alberta. The heaviest one was a 101 pound male. The average weight of the 12 adults (6 female, 6 male) was 87 pounds. The 1996 introductions came from NE British Columbia; the largest was a 135 pound male; the average for the adults (5 female, 10 male) was 112.6 pounds. Your wolf was larger than both these averages. Years ago I saw, in Glacier National Park, the mounted head of a female wolf taken there in a spring month and her weight was listed as 135 pounds. I was impressed! There were large wolves in the United States Rockies prior to their extripation. Sounds like Idaho has been good for these small northern wolves, a 150 pounder, WOW!
As to human population you said “Try doing some real math.” Granted there is lots of land that doesn’t have a person standing on it but land is needed to raise food and the more people the more food. Here comes the math: At the current rate of growth in 50 years the earth will have over 12 billion rather than the current 6.7 billion. Earth’s land area is 196,940,400 miles squared for short approximately 200,000,000 or 2 x 10^8 mi^2 (^ means raised to the shown power). The population is about 7 x 10^9. Dividing people by square miles gives 35 people per square mile. This inludes areas like Antarctica. Idaho has a population density of about 16/sqmi. 640 acres/sqmi divided by 35 people/sqmi gives about 18 acres per person, sounds small to me. We are lucky to live in an “underpopulated” area! What do you consider a reasonable number of Earth occupants? You sound like a person who likes to spend a lot of time alone outdoors – I would think you would prefer to see little or no population growth in Idaho. It is not just land that people use but resources.

Consider what you said – “I could care less who or what you like.” I believe what you mean is “I couldn’t care less……” think about it.

Jes – I responded to you also – go to the boise wolf party.

Lee,

Sarcasm, whoopeee, and perhaps you should visit with some government trappers, for example, those trappers killed a wolf near Fairfield Idaho which weighed 165 pounds, another killed at Danskin 150+ pounds. Some wolves get very large Lee, Recently, a wolf was killed on the road by a car, just a couple miles from here, it took two men to pick it up and load it in the officers truck. All wolves don’t get this big, but there are a few around that do. I have seen two german shepards in my life that weighed in at 135 respectively, one was mine.

I don’t see calculations for human deaths figured into those estimations of planet acres versus human growth, natural and un-natural, what about tidal wave wipeouts ? Earthquake ? Volcano, oh lets not forget our own depopulation measures of the last 6000 or more years called wars. Hell, just in the last two centurys 176,000,000 got exterminated for being to passive. you better add that up again.

Presidents have pandered the Constitution since its inception, see Congressional Globes, Annals and Records of Congrees to verify. These two presidential candidates both will take what ever wealth the people of America are willing to give up and pander it in the very same list of trough snufflers, the only real difference are minor variations in the story lines used to convince us which fiction to except, McCains being more fictional “National Security” and Obama’s being more fictional SocialJustice/Utility but rather neither intends to dismantle or fully diminsh the welfare state, the warfare state, or any other substantial part of this monopoly for the elites behind the curtain, these two clowns will continue to serve those masters who provided us with these two alternatives which are acceptable to the elites and beneficiaries of the elite status quo, Nothing, I repeat absolutely nothing will change. History proves this, and the next four years will also. Both will harm the hanging by a thread Gun possession laws.

Any true Constitutional historical researcher knows the document has been turned upside down and inside out, The Republic itself which is a government controlled by the constitution and bill of rights which is just not the case today, and in fact was only the case prior to the war of northern aggression against the Southern States who did under legal constitutional law, succeed from the Union based on true violations those sothern staes rejected. The Slavery issue was secondary, the first issue was the fight over the 14th red amendment. As well, Lincoln was killed due to the fact he would never allow its passing, His replacement fought against it but suffered threats and impeachment proceedings. Congressional Sources, Library of Congress proves it, it is a historical fact. Not taught in American Acedemia, geee, wonder why. http://www.ctwilcox.com this is a good place to start researching, as well as General Thomas M. Harris true accounts of his eyewitness on the spot jurist position in that trial in which four conspirators of Lincolns assassination ended hung, one being a woman. The general wrote a book on it, Rome’s Responsiblity for the assissination of Abraham Lincoln, Thomas provides documents in the book from the U.S. Court trial proving his case. 1897.

My sources ;
THE RED AMENDMENT and inlaw expose on the 14th amendment:300 page legal document.
What you should know about the United States Constitution and the Bill Of Rights. 300, pages. Dr. John Coleman, friend, and retired MI5 British Agent. Five years of Congressional research at the time of writing.
Vatican Assassins; Wounded In The House Of My Friends. 1836 pages. other source material are:
The Black Pope; A history of the Jesuits M.F Cusack 1896.
The Revolutionary Movement, a diagnosis of world disorders J. Findlater. 1933.
Popery, Puseyism, Jesuitism; Luigi Desanctus 1906.
Secret Instructions of the Jesuits W.C. Brownlee. 1937.
The lawful disclosures of Maria Monk and mysteries of a convent; is most important; as it reveals the power of the jesuit general within the united states in 1835, Imagine the extent of his power today via the FBI, CIA, and the NSA. 1840 documents.
Romanism as a world power; Luther S. Koffman, documents from 1921 thru 1922. True American Publishing company.
The History of Romanism; John Dowling. 1845.
The CRISIS; J. Wayne. Laurens. 1855.
Footprints of the Jesuits; by R.W. Thompson 1894.
Occult Theocracy; Lady Queenborough; Edith Starr Miller. 1930.
The Jesuits; A complete history of their open and secret proceedings from the foundations of the order to present time. A.J. Scott. London press. 1903.
Secret History of the Jesuits; Edmond Paris, Translated from french 1975.
My personal 12 years researching Congressional Globes, Annals Records of Congress. U.S. Courts. Library of Congress.

The treaty of Verona; 1822.
the monroe Doctrines answer to that treaty.
all in the congressional records.

Carl B. Rix, statement to Congress, Congressional Record page A3220, proving the United Nations Charter is being used to run the Nation and Subvert our Constitution.

History of the Jesuits, their origins, progress and designs. G.B. Nicolini 1854.
Behind the dictators; A factual Analysis of the Relationship of Nazi-Fascism and Roman Catholicism; L.H. Lehmann, 1942.

Proofs of a Conspiracy against all the religions and governments of Europe/all popular governments of the world. John Robison. 1798.
The Jesuit Conspiracy; Their secret plan of their order, The Abbate Leon. London. 1860.

Congressional Record proceedings and debates of the 76th Congress, third Session; Steps Toward British Union, A World State, and International Strife. Remarks of the Honorable J. Thorkelson of Montana in the house of reprsentatives, Monday August 19, 1940.

One King to find them, then bind them, ONE King to Rule them All. Once known as New World Order, Now called Global Horse shit. Lee, your flat out wrong, so ss Jon Clausen, and so is Beatrical.

If this is not enough let me know, I can do it again, I have every Congressional Globe from the the start of those debates in 1787 up till 1957 and counting, 30+ years of collections.

We have been scammed hard people.

Enjoy your appointed man of the next four years. dried spit is the difference between them.

George, I concurr.

More Population Figures!

854,123 abortions in the USA 2003 compare to 4k dead soilders in Iraq in the past 5 years

hmmm. democrats so your against the soilders getting killed but you don’t mind killing 854,123 babies a year…

As well, I like what a very wise scholarly fellow in London recently told me via-e-mail, this guy is top notch in the research field. He asked me once, Have you seen 7 billion birth certificates ? No I said, Don’t believe that BUNK then he said, look to who is telling that to you, have they lied before ? All the time I said. It is simply the Iron Mountain Report and it is BUNKUM.

Good grief. I suppose when it’s all over with we’ll meet our
Maker. Do you suppose He will be there with every child that
has ever been aborted? I hope so. I was responsible for
doing it once. It happened by accident the second time. We
were devastated.

It pains me to see how easy it seems to abort. We have done
a horrible job on this issue, sorry to say.

The way to stop or decrease abortions will never be done by any kind of legislation and it’s futile for political parties to even try (and it’s not their job).

It’s the job of people talking to people, in churches wherever. You have to change people’s hearts and minds about it. You cannot legislate how people feel.

This thread is going in a million different directions… from abortion to wolves to everything else in between… anyway…

Jon Clausen Says: “I, for one, would like to have a President who has spent a fair amount of time analyzing the constitution and values it greatly – even if I disagree with him on nuances of it’s interpretation – rather than one who simply uses it to pander.” He does list sources. Well said, Jon, thanks!

I agree that I would rather have a president that actually reads and analyzes. This is what troubles me much about Palin and McCain. They seem to bypass facts all the time and go by their “gut instinct” on everything, much in the same way that Ronald Reagan did. That may work for a while, but at some point, you have to have some intellectural curiosity, something I find frightening about Palin, in particular.

This new “breed” of conservatives we are seeing since Reagan is definitely less intellectual, more “gut instinct” frankly ill-informed and don’t like to read!

I believe that is why Colin Powell is supporting Obama — because he feels he has a “better mind.” I tend to agree with this.

Now whether I agree with Obama’s actual policies as they end up, I may end up to be against every single one of them! But he’s different and I think different can be good.

I think no matter who wins, our taxes are going up though.

“Bea Says,
“This thread is going in a million directions”…

That means it is going over your head.

Bea is right I much rather waste what little brain power I have left on Obama:

If Barack Obama believes the Constitution is fundamentally flawed, then how could he truthfully put his hand on the Bible and swear (or alternatively, affirm) to preserve, protect and defend the document? I don’t think he can. But given he’d replace Bill Clinton as liar-in-chief, what’s yet another lie, right?

Also, how could the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court offer the oath to a president-elect Obama, knowing Obama’s view of the Constitution?

As someone fixated on becoming president since who knows when in his life, Obama must know that every president must recite the following oath, in accordance with Article II, Section I of the Constitution: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Personally, I do not think this fascist, this Marxist from Chicago or wherever has the moral underpinning to also comprehend what “faithfully” means. Unless, that is, it’s to his Marxist foundation.

“Solemnly”? Ha! Oh, he’d be solemn. Yet another act to fool the masses.

Putting his hand on the Bible? Given he’s a Protestant Christian in name only, that’d be yet another lie.

As to the best of his ability? If past is prologue, then the best of his ability will be at best to give a “present” presidency.

That is, unless it’s taking your money and giving to others, hoisting the flag of surrender, installing leftist/liberal Supreme Court justice and other federal-bench judges, and pushing a racial agenda, including reparations for blacks.

Obama is a dangerous man, representing dangerous people in, and perhaps even outside of our country, who would gleefully and systematically destroy America.

Preserve, protect and defend the Constitution? He hasn’t the mettle or heart. Nor does he have the intention or political and cultural impetus to do so.

But if elected, Marxist, racially separatist, fascist, clueless, vengeful Obama will have earned the title that requires faithful defense of the Constitution.

Given his character and ideologies, though, he still will not have earned the right.

If Americans support abortion, let’s vote. . . Just this past term, in Stenberg vs. Carhart, the court expanded the apocryphal abortion right to an all-new right to stick a fork in the head of a half-born baby.

Taxes are like abortion, and not just because both are grotesque procedures supported by Democrats. You’re for them or against them. Taxes go up or down; government raises taxes or lowers them. But Democrats will not let the words abortion or tax hikes pass their lips.

Democrats cannot conceive of “hate speech” towards Christians because, in their eyes, Christians always deserve it.

Apparently, even crazy people prefer targets that can’t shoot back. The reason schools are consistently popular targets for mass murderers is precisely because of all the idiotic “Gun-Free School Zone” laws.

From the people who brought you “zero tolerance,” I present the Gun-Free Zone! Yippee! Problem solved! Bam! Bam! Everybody down! Hey, how did that deranged loner get a gun into this Gun-Free Zone?

Conservatives believe man was created in God’s image, while liberals believe they are gods. All of the behavioral tics of the liberals proceed from their godless belief that they can murder the unborn because they, the liberals, are themselves gods. They try to forcibly create ‘equality’ through affirmative action and wealth redistribution because they are gods. They flat-out lie, with no higher power to constrain them, because they are gods. They adore pornography and the mechanization of sex because man is just an animal, and they are gods. They revere the UN and not the U.S. because they aren’t Americans — they are gods.

Liberals refuse to condemn what societies have condemned for thousands of years – e.g., promiscuity, divorce, illegitimacy, homosexuality.

This is the way addled liberals really think. Even as they champion sucking the brains out of little babies, they think of themselves as indelibly compassionate because they favor an overweening, behemoth federal government.

Conservatives have a problem with women. For that matter, all men do.

Liberals have always had a thing about eliminating humans. Stalin wanted to eliminate the kulaks and Ukranians, vegetarian atheist Adolf Hitler wanted to eliminate the Jews, Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger wanted to eliminate poor blacks, DDT opponent Rachel Carson wanted to eliminate Africans (introduction to her book “Silent Spring” written by … Al Gore!), and population-control guru Paul Ehrlich wants to eliminate all humans.

But global warming is the most insane, psychotic idea liberals have ever concocted to kill off “useless eaters.” If we have to live in a pure “natural” environment like the Indians, then our entire transcontinental nation can only support about 1 million human beings. Sorry, fellas — 299 million of you are going to have to go.

Only white guilt could explain the insanely hyperbolic descriptions of Obama’s “eloquence.” His speeches are a run-on string of embarrassing, sophomoric Hallmark bromides.

Girl-power feminists who got where they are by marrying men with money or power — Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Arianna Huffington and John Kerry — love to complain about how hard it is for a woman to be taken seriously. It has nothing to do with their being women. It has to do with their cheap paths to power. Kevin Federline isn’t taken seriously either.

George, do you live in the last frontier? Your posting times
indicate it’s very late if you don’t.

Powell believes that a reduction in US forces will have to be accompanied by talks with Syria and Iran. “You have to talk to the people you dislike most in this dangerous world.”

The “bipartisan” Iraq panel has recommended that Iran and Syria can help stabilize Iraq. You know, the way Germany and Russia helped stabilize Poland in ’39.

No, I’m not moving my positions any. … I believe the same things that I’ve been speaking on for years, and I don’t see any reason to change.

If it were true that conservatives were racist, sexist, homophobic, fascist, stupid, inflexible, angry, and self-righteous, shouldn’t their arguments be easy to deconstruct?

Someone who is making a point out of anger, ideology, inflexibility, or resentment would presumably construct a flimsy argument. So why can’t the argument itself be dismembered rather than the speaker’s personal style or hidden motives? Why the evasions?

When a kid I argued with friends (for fun) that there was no Russia – it was made up by our government so they could collect taxes from us. I had never seen Russia, never met a Russian, I knew where it was claimed to be on the world – it was all a hoax. You have not seen the birth certificates so there are not billions of people in the world?

Greg, the point of the wolves was that the average weight to the nearest pound of the 27 adult “canadian wolves” introduced into Idaho was 101 pounds. The largest verified wolf was killed in central Alaska in 1939. Its weight was 175 pounds. You can say trappers have gotten a 165 pounder but exageration is rampant when it comes to reporting the size of these wolves – were these verified or word of mouth? Your german shepherd must have been packing a some extra weight or had some irish wolfhound or other large breed in his ancestry.

As for the population predictiion I projected the population in 50 years using the current growth rate of 1.167 %/year. This includes all those earthquakes, hurricanes, tsunami, wars. Future population = present population times e^rate times years. Or population 50 years hence = 6.7 billion times e^(0.0167 x 50). I used a calculator that has natural logs e. The number of people per square mile have nothing to do with all those factors you mentioned. Simply divide the current population by land area. You are the one who said to do the math. Also that “I do to change my mind all the time, based on facts”. It seems to me that you ignore facts and math.

If I HAD to choose between bringing unborn babies back or our 4,000 adult soldiers who were sent to war, I would bring back the soldiers as their deaths have affected more people.

I also believe that most rational thinking people would except the far right wing evangelics.

Not wanting to force women to carry babies under some circumstances does not make someone LIKE abortion. No one LIKES abortion.

May I remind you, too, that Nancy Regan, Barbara Bush, Cindy McCain and many other Republican women are PRO CHOICE.

So when you use the FALSE argument that it’s “only Liberals” who are pro-choice — that statement is blantantly inaccurate.

Greg in post 122 “50.5 Million abortions at a national cost of 35 trillion dollars in lost revenues . .”. Would you enlighten me about those lost revenues – this comes to $700,000 per abortion! Just doing the math.

“These same Liberals, anti-gun, anti hunting, anti birth, wish for a man who would scrap our Constitution, Obama’s own words in 2001, the founders got it wrong he says.”

Go to the source and check out the context – Obama said nothing about scrapping the Constitution!

I am not anti any of those things you mention – except anti birth – that is an individual choice.

The unborn would have been both good and bad, just like everyone else.

It’s not that the unborn are “worthless” — quite the contrary. Every life is precious; however, I am not going to tell a woman that she MUST carry a baby if she’s been raped or the victim of incest.

Sorry, that goes too far. No rational society would accept that kind of “logic” — only radical religious groups who impose their religion on the people — like in Afghanistan.

Some men have always hated just the idea of abortion as they feel it makes them less powerful.

In the animal world, mother birds will actually move eggs out of their nests (to leave them to die) if they feel they cannot take care of so many eggs, or if they feel there is something “wrong” with the egg. This is a scientific fact of nature.

We had a mother dove nest in our backyard a few summers back. We all watched the comings and goings of the mother bird. Then all of a sudden one day, we noticed one egg (out of 6 total) was out of the basket. It couldn’t have fallen out as the edges were too high and there hadn’t been any high winds.

We researched this and a professional birder who owns a bird store told us mother birds absolutely do this.

In the animal kingdom, I believe lions will sometimes even “eat” their young. Not sure why.

George,

Your statement that Democrats aren’t American somehow is eerily similar to Sarah Palin’s flawed, baseless,irrational and very bigoted statement that small town people are somehow “more American.”

That comment is an insult and a disgrace to all the teachers, social workers, nurses, firefighters, etc. and anyone else of any career who cares about this country and their neighbors who happens to have been born in and lives in the city or non rural areas.

Small town people are NOT more American than anyone else. That is a baseless stereotype based on pure ignorance.

ar Says (128): “Think of it this way: think of the lives the unborn would have affected.”

Positively or negatively? Change would to could:

The unborn could have grown into a serial killer, a Tim McVeigh, or any other number of bad characters. Sweet, innocent babies do not necessarily grow into desirable adults.

I just don’t see the argument as “what could have been.” It doesn’t really matter what “could have been.”

Abortion is not something to be taken lightly — it might seem to come across that way from the more vocal supporters as there are many who are trying to make it illegal.

In fact, I would compare the “fight” much like gun owners are “touchy” about their gun rights. They become very vocal when they feel their “rights” are being trampled on or when attempts to “control” or “take away” their rights.

Gosh, the situation is almost identical as far as “taking sides.” Both have heavily $$$ funded and very vocal lobbyists — NRAL, NRA…… this is getting weird…..

They win in the dark; we win in the light

Why is it that the same people who have the least confidence in the police and the military are the most willing to allow only the police and the military to have guns?

Got me — George, I have a lot of confidence in the police and the U.S. military as far as competence.

I don’t have much confidence in our leaders who decide what “wars” to send Americans off to fight.

Hussein praised his sons for putting up a brave fight, noting that U.S. forces had surrounded their compound with advanced weaponry, ground troops and warplanes.

In case that didn’t work, U.S. forces were prepared to tell Janet Reno that a small Cuban boy was inside the house.

Be careful your Confidence Don’t get you shot

What Does That Make Me?
By Lisa Fabrizio
October 30, 2008

The notion that a particular happenstance should determine your identity is, of course, silly and therefore funny. But how about the opposite?

The idea so popular with pollsters and pundits — especially in this presidential election — that what you are should determine your political ideology and how you vote is equally inane, yet inexplicably and sadly a way of life in modern America.

Whereas our founders were able to put aside their conditions in life, whether innate or acquired, in order to form a more perfect union and ensure a just and prosperous way of life for their posterity, this no longer appears to be true.

Identity politics and class warfare have further polarized an already divided nation, especially along the lines of gender, race and religion. But does it have to be this way? I decided to conduct a poll of one likely voter: myself.

I am a woman, so what does that make me? On the one hand, I’m supposed to vote for John McCain because he had the courage to make Sarah Palin his running mate. She ‘looks like me’, ergo I must vote with my own kind. Except that, as the liberal sisterhood tells me, no real woman could vote Republican since they refuse to support women’s ‘reproductive rights’.

Sorry, but I’m not buying either pitch; my own kind is the human race, and abortion has as its aim the destruction of the most helpless of that race for the sake of convenience.

I am also a single woman which should make me, in the eyes of popular culture, either an unhappy shrew or a lesbian, or both. In either case, this should most definitely make me a man-hater. But of course I am neither.

I’m just a woman who has simply waited for the good man that God has finally sent me. Far from hating men, I adore truly manly men, particularly those who are man enough to want to fight to protect me and the country we love.

I am a New Englander and unfortunately I know what this is supposed to make me: a knee-jerk liberal. Living as I do in Connecticut, a state which traditionally is at the top of the list of states paying out the most per capita in federal taxes and receiving the least back from Washington, I know all too well that I am virtually surrounded by the left.

Yet, I choose to follow in the footsteps of the great New England patriots who railed against unfair taxation and government officers who “harass our people, and eat out their substance.”

I am a Christian, and worse yet, a faithful one. So this makes me either one of the millions of Christians who, like the founders of our country, believe in our national motto, “In God We Trust,” or a dangerous, religious fanatic.

Until the last decade or so, Christians were a reliable Democratic voting block, but since then, more and more have refused to follow that party down the path toward a culture of death.

And unlike John Kerry, Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi, I am secure and joyful in the practice and knowledge of my faith.

I am a white person of European ancestry and, were I not a woman (or a liberal), that would make me a racist, domineering, greedy pig.

So, to assuage the guilt I must surely feel about all of this, I would have no choice but to vote for Barack Obama instead of John McCain who ‘looks like me’.

Of course, our black brothers and sisters are exempt from this redemptive process since racism in this country is a one-way street. Except that I am not ashamed of my heritage and therefore feel zero guilt, and I resent those who advise otherwise.

In summary, this likely voter loves liberty as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and hates Communism, Socialism, Nazism, Fascism and any other form of government that values human beings only as tools of the State and would dispose of those whose lives have no value in their eyes.

I believe in a greater good than that which enriches only my social stratum or my pocketbook. And that makes me an American.

—

Lisa Fabrizio is a columnist who hails from Connecticut. You may write her at mailbox@lisafab.com.

Why not go to war just for oil? We need oil.

What do Hollywood celebrities imagine fuels their private jets? How do they think their cocaine is delivered to them?

Liberals can’t just come out and say they want to take more of our money, kill babies, and discriminate on the basis of race

Democrats should run Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for president.

He’s more coherent than Dennis Kucinich, he dresses like their base, he’s more macho than John Edwards, and he’s willing to show up at a forum where he might get one hostile question.

– unlike the current Democratic candidates for president who won’t debate on Fox News Channel, and the name “Mahmoud Ahmadinejad” is surely no more frightening than “B. Hussein Obama.

No, Liberals don’t hate America — they hate its leaders — those intent on getting us into wars we don’t belong in.

They also hate hypocritical leaders who want to combine church and state.

Liberals love America — it’s the hypocrits they don’t love and wish would leave.

Your Right Liberals Love America Like O.J. Loved Nicole

Fox News isn’t even particularly conservative, though it is recognizably American.

I believe the one verified atrocity committed by Fox News was the wearing of American flag lapel pins after 9/11. Assuming – against all evidence – that Fox News is every bit as conservative as CBS is liberal, it is still just a small beachhead in a universe of liberal-speak.

But the mere existence of one solitary network that doesn’t toe the party line has driven the Left insane.

This isn’t merely to say that liberals have near-exclusive control over all major sources of information in this country, though that is true.

Nor is the point that liberals are narrow-minded and parochial, incapable of seeing the other fellow’s point of view, though that is also true.

And it’s not that, as a consequence, liberals impute inhumanity to their political opponents and are unfathomably hateful and vicious. That’s true, too.

This is the problem with all unbelievers, but with the rabid purposeful anti-Christian liberals it is this stumbling that brings out their vitriolic hatred of true Christians.

Liberals on the other hand love liberal so called “Christians” who take no stand on God’s word and twist Jesus’ teaching into “Jesus accepts any behavior and belief”.

The liberals love that because it validates their anything goes relativist moral positions (well anything goes except being a true bible believing Christian that is).

Why do the liberals hate us? One reason is because we have the audacity to proclaim openly that there are absolute truths.

The only “absolute truth” that liberals seem to believe is that bible believing Christians are the purveyors of the worst plague of destruction the universe has ever encountered. They call us “haters” when in truth it is they who hate us. They have an interesting definition of hate. There definition is the following.

If you disagree with our position and morality (or should I say lack thereof) it is not because you have a different view that could possibly make sense (not that liberals are concerned with what makes sense), it is simply because you hate us. Now what they do not understand is that a difference in world view is not automatically hate.

The reason we speak out against things like sexual immorality is because we know from the bible that it leads to many social problems. And guess what people….no one in their right mind can say that the rampant sexual immorality since the 1960’s has not led to major social problems like single mothers, breakdown in family relationships, increased drug use, sexually transmitted diseases, and an increase in people taking drugs just to try and cope with all the emotional pain that immorality has caused.

There is perhaps no greater contrast concerning an ability to be a blessing or a curse than that of sexuality. It is God who invented this most powerful form of intimacy. Within the confines of the Creators purpose for it, there is no superior form of human communion.

The contrast is not so, for sexuality that is outside of God’s purpose, there is only emotional, spiritual, and often physical ruin. So powerful is the passion, it often blinds of the consequences that are so clearly seen in our so called “liberated” society.

10 Liberals are relativists and hate Christians because Christians believe in absolute truth.

2) Liberals do not want anyone to say that immorality is immoral.

3) Liberals are selfish and are more interested in their “feelings” then they are with what is right for others.

4) Liberals misunderstand what Christians really believe.

5) Since liberals see themselves as the superior enlighten ones they do not recognize that taking a position against their position is not automatically hate.

6) Liberals do not want to listen to what makes sense, they would rather listen to their senses.

7) Liberals ignore the clear evidence of the result of their philosophical positions influence on the last 40 years. It had been a social disaster and they do not want to hear it.

8) They see Christians as intellectually inferior.

9) Liberals see Christians as wanting to impose their religion on them when in truth it is the liberals who have used the courts system to impose their secular humanism religion on all of us.

10) Liberals are spiritually lost and blind to the truth of the gospel. Consider the following bible verses:

“But the natural man receives not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” – 1 Corinthians 2:14

Greg, counting the chickens before they hatch? How about the ones that don’t end up with useful jobs to feed SS, the ones that get housed in jail? The mentally impaired? The ones that would have aborted naturally? As you don’t believe in the real weights of wolves or the population of 6.7 billion so I don’t believe the figure you give for the economic impact of abortion. If you can’t see the connection between population and world problems you have your head in the sand.

Greg said “Now what do I gotta do Lee, hold your hand and take you over to that government study we tax payers payed for ?”

FYI the author of the study is Dennis Howard, the president of the pro-life group Movement for a Better America. If you didn’t know this you should have checked into it; if you did then you lied. He has nothing to do with the government and the study was not paid for by tax payers. Considereing his affiliation I hardly consider his analysis to be unbiased.

Greg, you called it a government study! It was not.

Is that all the information Lee ? Are you gonna say the government did not have invlovement in this particular piece of research ? Are you sure ? It this the only study ? I will wait awhile before posting all of it. Now, one last question, Are you glad you were not in the 50.5 million aborted humans ? And can sit here and play keyboard commando with me instead having been flushed down some drain instead ? Is that a tough choice to make ? At we both can sit here and make it for ourselves…50.5 million could not.

Greg – you did not answer my last question. How can you disagree with the numbers if they real?

1. Guided by ultrasound, the abortionist grabs the baby’s leg with forceps.

2. The baby’s leg is pulled out into the birth canal.

3. The abortionist delivers the baby’s entire body, except for the head.

4. The abortionist jams scissors into the baby’s skull. The scissors are then opened to enlarge the hole.

5. The scissors are removed and a suction catheter is inserted. The child’s brains are sucked out, causing the skull to collapse.

6. The dead baby is then removed.

The above procedure does not constitute torture by liberal standards

Waterboarding

1. Waterboarding is a technique that simulates drowning in a controlled environment.

2. It consists of immobilizing an individual on his or her back, with the head inclined downward, and pouring water over the face.

3. It does not maim, cause permanent physical damage,or result in death.

Waterboarding is torture by liberal standards

You tell me??

Still don’t get the point? Sen. Dodd: Khalid Sheik Mohammed has taken the moral high ground from the US

Compare that case [the Moussaoui trial] to the case of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who organized the attacks of 9/11. He was held in a secret prison, where he claims he was tortured severely. Whether he is lying or not, by our actions we have allowed Khalid Mohammed to claim the moral high ground. Khalid Mohammed plays martyr to a world that is inclined to believe it.

Keep in mind that we give KSM three hots and a cot. He planned the attack on this country yet a liberal is outraged. Where is the outrage for the baby?

Britian will be adding Pro-lifers to their no-fly lists amongst terrorist extremists. Pro-aborts will get safe passage. I can see the NeW WoRld Of DisOrder will be very tyrannical for those still believing in creation, as predicted the world will turn on Gods followers and persecute them. The preparation’s are almost intact for this to happen. Strange that a cowardly new age would get billed as a Brave New World.

Greg, again, you called it a government study! It was not.

Immigratin – let them in — yes, you’re right, that is a CONSERVATIVE stance because they can get cheap labor.

John McCain wanted to DO NOTHING about illegal immigration until he saw that the people were demanding it.

Politicians don’t want to touch the issue.

Know why?

Because they are both afraid of losing the Hispanice vote and appearing “racist.”

So you are wrong George, that it is the “liberals” who want to let free and unfettered illegal immigration.

You’re just spouting off silly statements that have no basis in truth.

No liberal cause is defended with more dishonesty than abortion. No matter what else they pretend to care about from time to time–undermining national security, aiding terrorists, oppressing the middle class, freeing violent criminals–the single most important item on the Democrats’ agenda is abortion.

Indeed, abortion is the one issue the Democratic Party is willing to go to war over–except in the Muslim world, which is jam-packed with prohibitions on abortion, because going to war against a Muslim nation might also serve America’s national security objectives.

To a liberal, 2,200 military deaths in the entire course of a war in Iraq is unconscionable, but 1.3 million aborted babies in America is something to celebrate.

The Orwellian dishonesty about abortion begins with the Left’s utter refusal to use the word abortion.

It would be as if members of the National Rifle Association refused to use the word gun. These “pro-choicers” treat abortion the way Muslims treat Mohammed. It’s so sacred, it must not be mentioned.

Instead we get a slew of liberal euphemisms for baby-killing: “reproductive freedom,” “a woman’s right to control her own body,” “terminating a pregnancy,” “freedom of choice,” “a woman’s own private medical decision,” “a procedure,” “access to health care,” “family planning,” “our bodies, our selves,” “choice.”

Choice is important when it comes to killing babies, but not so much when it comes to whom you hire, whom you associate with, what you think about evolution, how much gas your care consumes, how much water comes out of your bathroom showerhead….

The only other practice that was both defended and unspeakable in America like this was slavery….

Abortion is the sacrament and Roe v. Wade is Holy Writ.

This is why we have to have World War III every time there’s an opening on the Supreme Court. As long as Roe is the law of the land, elected Democrats can hide behind the Supreme Court’s ruling.

They rarely have to cast votes on abortion bills, because the High Court has removed abortion from the democratic process. All the Democrats have to do is smear any Supreme Court nominee who might possibly vote to overturn Roe and finally ALLOW AMERICANS TO VOTE ON ABORTION!!

President Reagan’s essay,

“Abortion and the conscience of the nation”…

“Woman of the world, you have chosen to become murderers, killing your young. You defy the Eternal Father in your quest for luxury and pleasure. You have cast aside your role as women and have aligned yourselves with homosexuality and lesbianism, and as such you corrupt the young. Woe to a generation that has made sin a way of life.”
– Our Lady of the Roses, June 1, 1978

The following article was written by President Ronald Reagan in the spring of 1983:

The 10th anniversary of the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade is a good time for us to pause and reflect. Our nationwide policy of abortion-on-demand through all nine months of pregnancy was neither voted for by our people nor enacted by our legislators—

not a single state had such unrestricted abortion before the Supreme Court decreed it to be national policy in 1973.

But the consequences of this judicial decision are now obvious: since 1973, more than 15 million unborn children have had their lives snuffed out by legalized abortions.

That is over ten times the number of Americans lost in all our nation’s wars.

Make no mistake, abortion-on-demand is not a right granted by the Constitution. No serious scholar, including one disposed to agree with the Court’s result, has argued that the framers of the Constitution intended to create such a right.

Shortly after the Roe v. Wade decision, Professor John Hart Ely, now Dean of Stanford Law School, wrote that the opinion “is not constitutional law and gives almost no sense of an obligation to try to be.”

Nowhere do the plain words of the Constitution even hint at a “right” so sweeping as to permit abortion up to the time the child is ready to be born. Yet that is what the Court ruled.

As an act of “raw judicial power” (to use Justice White’s biting phrase), the decision by the seven-man majority in Roe v. Wade has so far been made to stick. But the Court’s decision has by no means settled the debate. Instead, Roe v. Wade has become a continuing prod to the conscience of the nation.

Abortion concerns not just the unborn child, it concerns every one of us. The English poet, John Donne, wrote: “. . . any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.”

We cannot diminish the value of one category of human life— the unborn—without diminishing the value of all human life.

We saw tragic proof of this truism last year when the Indiana courts allowed the starvation death of “Baby Doe” in Bloomington because the child had Down’s Syndrome.

Many of our fellow citizens grieve over the loss of life that has followed Roe v. Wade. Margaret Heckler, soon after being nominated to head the largest department of our government, Health and Human Services, told an audience that she believed abortion to be the greatest moral crisis facing our country today.

And the revered Mother Teresa, who works in the streets of Calcutta ministering to dying people in her world-famous mission of mercy, has said that “the greatest misery of our time is the generalized abortion of children.”

Over the first two years of my Administration I have closely followed and assisted efforts in Congress to reverse the tide of abortion— efforts of Congressmen, Senators and citizens responding to an urgent moral crisis. Regrettably, I have also seen the massive efforts of those who, under the banner of “freedom of choice,” have so far blocked every effort to reverse nationwide abortion-on-demand.

Despite the formidable obstacles before us, we must not lose heart. This is not the first time our country has been divided by a Supreme Court decision that denied the value of certain human lives.

The Dred Scott decision of 1857 was not overturned in a day, or a year, or even a decade. At first, only a minority of Americans recognized and deplored the moral crisis brought about by denying the full humanity of our black brothers and sisters; but that minority persisted in their vision and finally prevailed.

They did it by appealing to the hearts and minds of their countrymen, to the truth of human dignity under God. From their example, we know that respect for the sacred value of human life is too deeply engrained in the hearts of our people to remain forever suppressed.

But the great majority of the American people have not yet made their voices heard, and we cannot expect them to—any more than the public voice arose against slavery—until the issue is clearly framed and presented.

What, then, is the real issue? I have often said that when we talk about abortion, we are talking about two lives—the life of the mother and the life of the unborn child. Why else do we call a pregnant woman a mother?

I have also said that anyone who doesn’t feel sure whether we are talking about a second human life should clearly give life the benefit of the doubt. If you don’t know whether a body is alive or dead, you would never bury it. I think this consideration itself should be enough for all of us to insist on protecting the unborn.

The case against abortion does not rest here, however, for medical practice confirms at every step the correctness of these moral sensibilities. Modern medicine treats the unborn child as a patient. Medical pioneers have made great breakthroughs in treating the unborn—for genetic problems, vitamin deficiencies, irregular heart rhythms, and other medical conditions.

Who can forget George Will’s moving account of the little boy who underwent brain surgery six times during the nine weeks before he was born? Who is the patient if not that tiny unborn human being who can feel pain when he or she is approached by doctors who come to kill rather than to cure?

The real question today is not when human life begins, but, What is the value of human life?

The abortionist who reassembles the arms and legs of a tiny baby to make sure all its parts have been torn from its mother’s body can hardly doubt whether it is a human being.

The real question for him and for all of us is whether that tiny human life has a God-given right to be protected by the law— the same right we have.

What more dramatic confirmation could we have of the real issue than the Baby Doe case in Bloomington, Indiana?

The death of that tiny infant tore at the hearts of all Americans because the child was undeniably a live human being—one lying helpless before the eyes of the doctors and the eyes of the nation.

The real issue for the courts was not whether Baby Doe was a human being. The real issue was whether to protect the life of a human being who had Down’s Syndrome, who would probably be mentally handicapped, but who needed a routine surgical procedure to unblock his esophagus and allow him to eat.

A doctor testified to the presiding judge that, even with his physical problem corrected, Baby Doe would have a “non-existent” possibility for “a minimally adequate quality of life”—in other words, that retardation was the equivalent of a crime deserving the death penalty.

The judge let Baby Doe starve and die, and the Indiana Supreme Court sanctioned his decision.

Federal law does not allow federally-assisted hospitals to decide that Down’s Syndrome infants are not worth treating, much less to decide to starve them to death.

Accordingly, I have directed the Departments of Justice and HHS to apply civil rights regulations to protect handicapped newborns. All hospitals receiving federal funds must post notices which will clearly state that failure to feed handicapped babies is prohibited by federal law.

The basic issue is whether to value and protect the lives of the handicapped, whether to recognize the sanctity of human life. This is the same basic issue that underlies the question of abortion.

The 1981 Senate hearings on the beginning of human life brought out the basic issue more clearly than ever before.

The many medical and scientific witnesses who testified disagreed on many things, but not on the scientific evidence that the unborn child is alive, is a distinct individual, or is a member of the human species. They did disagree over the value question, whether to give value to a human life at its early and most vulnerable stages of existence.

Regrettably, we live at a time when some persons do not value all human life.

They want to pick and choose which individuals have value. Some have said that only those individuals with “consciousness of self” are human beings. One such writer has followed this deadly logic and concluded that “shocking as it may seem, a newly born infant is not a human being.”

A Nobel Prize winning scientist has suggested that if a handicapped child “were not declared fully human until three days after birth, then all parents could be allowed the choice.” In other words, “quality control” to see if newly born human beings are up to snuff.

Obviously, some influential people want to deny that every human life has intrinsic, sacred worth. They insist that a member of the human race must have certain qualities before they accord him or her status as a “human being.”

Events have borne out the editorial in a California medical journal which explained three years before Roe v. Wade that the social acceptance of abortion is a “defiance of the long-held Western ethic of intrinsic and equal value for every human life regardless of its stage, condition, or status.”

Every legislator, every doctor, and every citizen needs to recognize that the real issue is whether to affirm and protect the sanctity of all human life, or to embrace a social ethic where some human lives are valued and others are not. As a nation, we must choose between the sanctity of life ethic and the “quality of life” ethic.

I have no trouble identifying the answer our nation has always given to this basic question, and the answer that I hope and pray it will give in the future. American was founded by men and women who shared a vision of the value of each and every individual.

They stated this vision clearly from the very start in the Declaration of Independence, using words that every schoolboy and schoolgirl can recite:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

We fought a terrible war to guarantee that one category of mankind— black people in America—could not be denied the inalienable rights with which their Creator endowed them. The great champion of the sanctity of all human life in that day, Abraham Lincoln, gave us his assessment of the Declaration’s purpose. Speaking of the framers of that noble document, he said

This was their majestic interpretation of the economy of the Universe. This was their lofty, and wise, and noble understanding of the justice of the Creator to His creatures. Yes, gentlemen, to all his creatures, to the whole great family of man. In their enlightened belief, nothing stamped with the divine image and likeness was sent into the world to be trodden on. . . They grasped not only the whole race of man then living, but they reached forward and seized upon the farthest posterity. They erected a beacon to guide their children and their children’s children, and the countless myriads who should inhabit the earth in other ages.

He warned also of the danger we would face if we closed our eyes to the value of life in any category of human beings:

I should like to know if taking this old Declaration of Independence, which declares that all men are equal upon principle and making exceptions to it where will it stop. If one man says it does not mean a Negro, why not another say it does not mean some other man?

When Congressman John A. Bingham of Ohio drafted the Fourteenth Amendment to guarantee the rights of life, liberty, and property to all human beings, he explained that all are “entitled to the protection of American law, because its divine spirit of equality declares that all men are created equal.”

He said the right guaranteed by the amendment would therefore apply to “any human being.” Justice William Brennan, writing in another case decided only the year before Roe v. Wade, referred to our society as one that “strongly affirms the sanctity of life.”

Another William Brennan—not the Justice—has reminded us of the terrible consequences that can follow when a nation rejects the sanctity of life ethic:

The cultural environment for a human holocaust is present whenever any society can be misled into defining individuals as less than human and therefore devoid of value and respect.

As a nation today, we have not rejected the sanctity of human life. The American people have not had an opportunity to express their view on the sanctity of human life in the unborn.

I am convinced that Americans do not want to play God with the value of human life. It is not for us to decide who is worthy to live and who is not.

Even the Supreme Court’s opinion in Roe v. Wade did not explicitly reject the traditional American idea of intrinsic worth and value in all human life; it simply dodged this issue.

The Congress has before it several measures that would enable our people to reaffirm the sanctity of human life, even the smallest and the youngest and the most defenseless. The Human Life Bill expressly recognizes the unborn as human beings and accordingly protects them as persons under our Constitution.

This bill, first introduced by Senator Jesse Helms, provided the vehicle for the Senate hearings in 1981 which contributed so much to our understanding of the real issue of abortion.

The Respect Human Life Act, just introduced in the 98th Congress, states in its first section that the policy of the United States is “to protect innocent life, both before and after birth.” This bill, sponsored by Congressman Henry Hyde and Senator Roger Jepsen, prohibits the federal government from performing abortions or assisting those who do so, except to save the life of the mother.

It also addresses the pressing issue of infanticide which, as we have seen, flows inevitably from permissive abortion as another step in the denial of the inviolability of innocent human life.

I have endorsed each of these measures, as well as the more difficult route of constitutional amendment, and I will give these initiatives my full support. Each of them, in different ways, attempts to reverse the tragic policy of abortion-on-demand imposed by the Supreme Court ten years ago.

Each of them is a decisive way to affirm the sanctity of human life.

We must all educate ourselves to the reality of the horrors taking place. Doctors today know that unborn children can feel a touch within the womb and that they respond to pain.

But how many Americans are aware that abortion techniques are allowed today, in all 50 states, that burn the skin of a baby with a salt solution, in an agonizing death that can last for hours?

Another example: two years ago, the Philadelphia Inquirer ran a Sunday special supplement on “The Dreaded Complication.” The “dreaded complication” referred to in the article—the complication feared by doctors who perform abortions—is the survival of the child despite all the painful attacks during the abortion procedure.

Some unborn children do survive the late-term abortions the Supreme Court has made legal. Is there any question that these victims of abortion deserve our attention and protection? Is there any question that those who don’t survive were living human beings before they were killed?

Late-term abortions, especially when the baby survives, but is then killed by starvation, neglect, or suffocation, show once again the link between abortion and infanticide. The time to stop both is now. As my Administration acts to stop infanticide, we will be fully aware of the real issue that underlies the death of babies before and soon after birth.

Our society has, fortunately, become sensitive to the rights and special needs of the handicapped, but I am shocked that physical or mental handicaps of newborns are still used to justify their extinction.

This Administration has a Surgeon General, Dr. C. Everett Koop, who has done perhaps more than any other American for handicapped children, by pioneering surgical techniques to help them, by speaking out on the value of their lives, and by working with them in the context of loving families. You will not find his former patients advocating the so-called “quality-of-life” ethic.

I know that when the true issue of infanticide is placed before the American people, with all the facts openly aired, we will have no trouble deciding that a mentally or physically handicapped baby has the same intrinsic worth and right to life as the rest of us. As the New Jersey Supreme Court said two decades ago, in a decision upholding the sanctity of human life,

“a child need not be perfect to have a worthwhile life.”

Whether we are talking about pain suffered by unborn children, or about late-term abortions, or about infanticide, we inevitably focus on the humanity of the unborn child. Each of these issues is a potential rallying point for the sanctity of life ethic. Once we as a nation rally around any one of these issues to affirm the sanctity of life, we will see the importance of affirming this principle across the board.

Malcolm Muggeridge, the English writer, goes right to the heart of the matter: “Either life is always and in all circumstances sacred, or intrinsically of no account; it is inconceivable that it should be in some cases the one, and in some the other.” The sanctity of innocent human life is a principle that Congress should proclaim at every opportunity.

It is possible that the Supreme Court itself may overturn its abortion rulings. We need only recall that in Brown v. Board of Education the court reversed its own earlier “separate-but-equal” decision.

I believe if the Supreme Court took another look at Roe v. Wade, and considered the real issue between the sanctity of life ethic and the quality of life ethic, it would change its mind once again.

As we continue to work to overturn Roe v. Wade, we must also continue to lay the groundwork for a society in which abortion is not the accepted answer to unwanted pregnancy.

Pro-life people have already taken heroic steps, often at great personal sacrifice, to provide for unwed mothers. I recently spoke about a young pregnant woman named Victoria, who said,

“In this society we save whales, we save timber wolves and bald eagles and Coke bottles. Yet, everyone wanted me to throw away my baby.”

She has been helped by Save-a-Life, a group in Dallas, which provides a way for unwed mothers to preserve the human life within them when they might otherwise be tempted to resort to abortion. I think also of House of His Creation in Catesville, Pennsylvania, where a loving couple has taken in almost 200 young women in the past ten years.

They have seen, as a fact of life, that the girls are not better off having abortions than saving their babies. I am also reminded of the remarkable Rossow family of Ellington, Connecticut, who have opened their hearts and their home to nine handicapped adopted and foster children.

The Adolescent Family Life Program, adopted by Congress at the request of Senator Jeremiah Denton, has opened new opportunities for unwed mothers to give their children life. We should not rest until our entire society echoes the tone of John Powell in the dedication of his book, Abortion: The Silent Holocaust, a dedication to every woman carrying an unwanted child: “Please believe that you are not alone. There are many of us that truly love you, who want to stand at your side, and help in any way we can.” And we can echo the always-practical woman of faith, Mother Teresa, when she says, “If you don’t want the little child, that unborn child, give him to me.” We have so many families in America seeking to adopt children that the slogan “every child a wanted child” is now the emptiest of all reasons to tolerate abortion.

I have often said we need to join in prayer to bring protection to the unborn. Prayer and action are needed to uphold the sanctity of human life. I believe it will not be possible to accomplish our work, the work of saving lives, “without being a soul of prayer.” The famous British Member of Parliament, William Wilberforce, prayed with his small group of influential friends, the “Clapham Sect,” for decades to see an end to slavery in the British empire. Wilberforce led that struggle in Parliament, unflaggingly, because he believed in the sanctity of human life. He saw the fulfillment of his impossible dream when Parliament outlawed slavery just before his death.

Let his faith and perseverance be our guide. We will never recognize the true value of our own lives until we affirm the value in the life of others, a value of which Malcolm Muggeridge says:. . . however low it flickers or fiercely burns, it is still a Divine flame which no man dare presume to put out, be his motives ever so humane and enlightened.”

Abraham Lincoln recognized that we could not survive as a free land when some men could decide that others were not fit to be free and should therefore be slaves.

Likewise, we cannot survive as a free nation when some men decide that others are not fit to live and should be abandoned to abortion or infanticide. My Administration is dedicated to the preservation of America as a free land, and there is no cause more important for preserving that freedom than affirming the transcendent right to life of all human beings, the right without which no other rights have any meaning.

This just hit my mail box.

http://www.grassfire.org/scorebook/qv6_7.asp?CID=21&RID=17611807

It’s a quick-look-compare begining with abortion, from the
candidates.

Golleeee…. Think I must have been gone a month of Sundays! I come back and see all this here writin…..gollleeee!
How could I ever catch up with it? Guess I won’t try…Hunting has been fun, though not productive, yet….Had lots of deer around but not the one to take home..I’m getting real particular about what I have to haul out….it’s getting harder every year! Glad to be alive and healthy enough to be there in the first place, though.

Youall trying for another world record on this here thread? And George, them were some good long ‘uns I see and have read up there…
See youall were doing some backwards talkin, too…but bet those damn liberals understood it better than me!
They talk backwards all the time….
Now, lets get this election straight and I’ll come awake in the morning with a smile and know the world is still in God’s hands and not just some howdedo……

Afghanistan and Islam? Didn’t you cast your vote for the recognition or legitimization of this same Sharia Law to be enacted on Muslim women who may be US Citizens?

Placing this law before our FLAWED CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS?

Jul 4, 2008 … The most senior judge in England yesterday gave his blessing to the use of sharia law to resolve disputes among Muslims.

Oct 31, 2008
A liberal lawmaker from the south German state of Bavaria has supported the introduction of the Sharia law in his conservative home state, …

USA Today – Oct 27, 2008
By Al Webb, Religion News Service LONDON — The British government has ruled that some aspects of Islamic sharia law can be accepted into the country’s legal …

EDGE Boston, MA – 8 hours ago
Muslims living in the UK have called for Sharia law, or Muslim religious law, to be incorporated into English law.

Wesley Pruden, the irascible editor emeritus of the Washington Times received a complaint from an Obama supporter.

She argued the association with the terrorist Bill Ayers was no big deal. She, an English professor, could not understand “what precisely is the great fear?”

The fear, Madame, is that we are going off a cliff toward hard-left European socialism and neutrality, which in its cowardice and incapability of protecting and defending its liberty and culture, is sliding toward an abyss of appeasement and cultural diversity.

Where Sharia law runs parallel with the laws handed down from the Magna Carter and where the defense of what freedom and liberty remain becomes a bother and a pain. That is where Bill Ayers, Reverend Wright, and myriad other friends of Barack Obama want to go.

The terror masters then win, Madame Professor. And that tragically, you are obviously too stupid to understand. Let us pray America is not.

Judah’s Captivity Symbolized

12:1 The word of the Lord came to me: 2 “Son of man, you dwell in the midst of a rebellious house, who have eyes to see, but see not, who have ears to hear, but hear not, for they are a rebellious house.
So we now have a black, left wing liberal as POTUS…and my heart aches for America, who have closed their eyes, and listened to the sweet speeches, and believed in the hope that something new would would make their world better. And those who put their trust in man will fail, for man is but a small part of the God who created him. And these will worship the man and the images they create, and declare there is no God but their own, who’s image they have created, and who’s God they serve, and never see their own need of redemption, for they believed the lies of men and forsook the truth of His sacrifice.

jes Says: “and Bea, where were you for the last 50-60 years, back when abortion was illegal to begin with…and we had nowhere near the immorality we have today?”

I wasn’t around that many years ago, but maybe you could ask Laura Bush or Barbara Bush or Nancy Reagan or Cindy McCain or a bunch of the other “conservative” women who are pro-choice.

Red Liberal Communist President fascist Joe Biden is really what we got and any thinking person knows it. Bea, don’t you need to go get your children sterilized or something, just saves the trouble of abortions later, and who really wants grandchildren anyhow…..In the this Brave New World.

100,000 innocent Iraqi civilians have died in the Iraq war and 4,000 American troops and counting! And you only care about unborn babies.

Yes, and GW Bush and his war mongering idiots WILL be held accountable by GOD for the murder of 100,000 innocents in Iraq and 4,000 American troops.

Now we get to count Obama’s and Biden’s dead while being top puppets for Satan/Saturn EL, LUCIFER. Hell, lets give em a chance to kill kill kill kill to, because they will. Dems killed 58,000 Americans in Vietnam and over 1 million North and South Vietnamese, men, women and children. Now we get to watch wanna be Serial killer Obama do it.

Lee, Greg is either a religious fanatic or a bit unbalanced.

British SIS, the CIA, Pakistans ISI, Israel, The oil bourse of Saddam Hussien,Stopping trading in u.s. currency, The Military Industrial complex, along with its puppets Dick Cheney-George Bush-Colin Powell-CIA trained Osama Bin Laden-Mr. War-fare Donald Rumsfeld-And the Democrat-Republican 109th Congress, all of them damn near. Now watch the new boys run it, with the same DEBORAH STABENOW in all these agencies funds mixing for years still there, just the same boss with a new face. Notice Michell Obama’s symbolic black widow dress at the 2 million dollar party…ha ha ha.

Funny how socialism historically is a failure, yet minorities keep supporting it, It is really amazing to see how hard blacks/latinos/white trash, all looking for a free lunch, any kinda handout, from the u.s. corporate fascist empire, working so hard to support its theft from people willing to work and bleed 80 hours per week like me, so to give them lazy f*)^%s their handout…supporting the chains of slavery willingly on themselves and others…me, JUST HILARIOUS…And the LIAR.. “Messiah” Obama is going to work very hard just to those ends, by enslaving us all further into servitude by building up on a more fascist corporation empire, yes change for more big government, making it more powerful, a bigger thief in the dark night, and weakening the populance even further he also will support racial cleansing of the very people who worked so hard to get him his new job as lead puppet, it just baffles me to no end to see these liberals, especially white liberals jumping for joy with teaRS ON THEIR CHEEKS no less—-F#%&!ing encredible.

I will shut down my business, stop supporting this government with taxes, ASAP…Because I don’t gotta support your man. And I will not. No body is gonna tell me how much I will give to losers who sit on their ass and expect a free lunch. I will get thru this life with out ever needing a Socialist inSecurity handout.

Bea, I might be unbalanced, but you are one spun bitch.

fyi Jes, “Civilians” GENERALLY means citizens who are UNARMED including women, children, etc.

So the Iraqi citizens are RESPONSIBLE for bringing war to themselves? Saddam had nothing to do with it then? Seriously, that is a downright stupid comment.

I don’t know who Lee is but we both need to find a website where there are intelligent thinking people. It seems harder to find all the time………

jes, I didn’t say it was a 6′ deer; just reporting what I found in a newspaper; deer have killed more people in NA by far than wolves. We all know that deer-car collisions cause lots of fatalities but don’t usually consider deer actually attacking and killing MAN. “GILBERTOWN, Ala. 2003 — An elderly man was killed Monday when his pet deer attacked him. The nine-point buck gored and mauled 79-year-old Donald Sellers while Sellers was working on a fence on his property.”

I actually got onto this sight because of the lies being repeated in many blogs regarding wolves.

Sellers had raised the deer since it was a fawn and the sheriff says it often became aggressive during the rutting and mating season. He believes that might have prompted the attack.

A grandson discovered the body, then shot and killed the deer when it acted aggressively toward him.

Wouldn’t trust a pet? wolf, fox, bear, badger, skunk get my point! Wild animals are just that Wild.

The Beast Of Gevaudan

One of the most extraordinary stories of wolf attack comes from 18th century France. Under the appellation the ‘Beast of Gevaudan’, a wolf stood accused of killing more than one hundred people, partly eating many of them, and wounding fifty more, in over two hundred attacks.

The Gevaudan wolf affair drew a lot of attention at the time, is one of the most documented historical records of wolf attack on humans.

LMAO, now Liberals call retirement treason….HA ha ha ha..No sense being productive under this free loader Kenyan punk. Let his old Aunty from Kenya living in a Boston Ghetto dive apartment complex live like a dog while he sucked up millions in the public coffers…..what an asshole. We will not mention his name ever again, he is FDRs nephew, Jimmy Carters bastard son……an anglo-saxon white elite ass kissing uncle tom.

Bea, so now the “civilian” population has no responsibility in regard to who their leaders are and what they do? That sounds like the kind of crap you’ll hear after Obama brings this country to it’s knees…(Oh, we didn’t KNOW…oh, my goodness!)
And according to you, no one deserves what they get, neither an individual nor a country….(that’s called a cop-out, folks) And it will be a typical excuse for what happens under Obama…

And, George, I hope that isn’t true that you’re going to mute Obama….we need to keep our ears open as well to what is going on, to prepare for the worst…or to see what change is going to take place.
The “presidential knowledge, and power” may well change Obama for the better…or worse. And that is the unanswered question.
Believe me, God still loves this country, and it’s basic roots, of faith, hard work, and obedience to His will…and He will not punish us all, or uproot the “tares”, but still many may suffer, and should, but each one, including Obama, has the choise to make….and no one knows what that will be.

And the word of the day, from: Ezekiel 14:12-16:42
Jerusalem Will Not Be Spared

12 “And the word of the Lord came to me: 13 “Son of man, when a land sins against me by acting faithlessly, and I stretch out my hand against it and break its supply [1] of bread and send famine upon it, and cut off from it man and beast, 14 even if these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, they would deliver but their own lives by their righteousness, declares the Lord God.

15 “If I cause wild beasts to pass through the land, and they ravage it, and it be made desolate, so that no one may pass through because of the beasts, 16 even if these three men were in it, as I live, declares the Lord God, they would deliver neither sons nor daughters. They alone would be delivered, but the land would be desolate.”

I will then only add, let the wailing of the fools begin.

AMEN.

Lee, So you like wolves too, huh? Yes, somehow I ended up here when I typed in “wolves” one day. I am a huge advocate of wolves and hate the distortion, lies and myths that float around various blogs, etc.

It’s no use discussing anything here — closed ears, minds, etc…….

They have already made judgements on Obama’s presidency before he’s even stepped foot into the oval office!

http://finance.yahoo.com/taxes/article/106103/How-Obama's-Tax-Plan-Could-Affect-You

Hey, Lee, do you know of any blogs, etc. where intelligent, free thinking people hang out? Those that like all wild animals including wolves, are fiscally conservative, not married to the Democrats or Republicans…. do not like Michael Moore…. do not like Sarah Palin…… it’s really tough to find independent minded people who are not straight up left or right…..

Bea, Try Ralph Maughan’s Wildlife News. Follows environmental issues primarily in the NW. Lives in Pocatello, ID. Lots of good comments in the blogs by thinking people including Robert Hoskins a hunter and president of the Dubois Wildlife Association, Robert Jackson former field ranger in Yellowstone NP for 30 or so years, Brian Ertz of Western Water Sheds. Civilized and no name calling or putdowns. Scripture is not used to “support” positions. Ralph has probably spent at least as much time in Idaho Wilderness areas as Greg Farber.

American Thinker has some decent articles but it’s, again, partisan, to the right.

I want something that is not partisan leaning at all…….a publication that can see the good points of each party including the independents, etc……….and each party definitely has their good and bad points……..

You realy have no comprehension of any of this do you?? Your a woman your opinion won’t matter. Their will be nothing you can save. You will not even be able to save yourself. You will be a slave.

# This year, newly revealed federal court documents that were accepted into evidence during the trial of the Texas-based Holy Land Foundation revealed further the inner thinking of the Muslim Brotherhood about its global mission.

A sixteen-page Arabic document discloses: “The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within.”

The Muslim Brotherhood and Al-Qaeda differ regarding tactics but share a common strategy. Al-Qaeda favors an implacable jihad to destroy the economies of the Western countries. How they doing on that one?

The Muslim Brotherhood supports terrorism and jihad against foreign presence in the Islamic world, but its top priority is constructing a Muslim infrastructure in the West which will slowly but surely enable it to rule during the 21st century.

As far as the final goal is concerned, there are no policy differences between al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood. The two organizations have the same objective: to place the entire world under an Islamic caliphate.

This information is given by the Jews so in your opinion it is bias. If you have any understanding of Judaism you can bet they know about being destroyed as a chosen nation many times in their long history. So I have to support what they say is exactly what it is.

http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=443&PID=0&IID=1920

July 27, 2008
‘Radical Islam Gaining Ground On British Campuses’ – So How About Obama And Radical Islam In America?

Topics: Understanding Islam

http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2008/07/radical_islam_g.php

Bea Says:

100,000 innocent Iraqi civilians have died in the Iraq war and 4,000 American troops and counting! And you only care about unborn babies.

We are going to need these these Babies!

They didn’t sign up to fight for gold or colonial conquest or “the economy.” The soldiers, sailors, airmen, guardsmen and Marines in Mesopotamia, Afghanistan, the Persian Gulf and the Philippine archipelago volunteered to defend us and protect our liberty from those who had done us grievous harm.

They raised their right hands and took an oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States.” They understand what it means to “bear true faith and allegiance.” Most of them have seen parts of the world where there is no freedom, and they know that freedom is an idea worth fighting for, preferably at a great distance from home.

When I was a young man I raised my hand and took the same oath. I believe now just as I did then! You insult your freedoms.

Ever hear of the war of man? God is searching for good soldiers I contend we will need these Babies:

BIASED TOWARD EVIL

The Word of God plainly teaches us that all men, since the fall of Adam, are born with a decided bias toward evil, with an utter hatred of God (Mark 7:21-23; Rom. 8:7). Sin is not a social disease. It is not something a man has to learn, or be taught. It is not something we catch from others. Sin is the inbred family disease of our race.

It is a matter of the heart. Because our hearts are evil, we do evil. The evil tendencies of our hearts are guarded, restrained, and kept in check by many things. But the seeds of evil are in our hearts by nature.

This is what our Lord tells us. All men, regardless of age, actions, or social standing, are vile, loathsome, and corrupt at heart. This must be evidently true to any reasonable man. History tells us that man is a depraved creature.

Who can read what men have done to men throughout history and even think about questioning the fact of man’s depravity?

Our daily newspapers tells you that man is depraved. Every newspaper in the world is a daily declaration of the fact that man is evil at heart. We see clear evidence of human depravity in our most darling children.

What mother ever had to teach her child to lie, cheat, be selfish, or disobedient? Every man’s conscience testifies of his depravity. Where is the man, or woman, who would want the world to know what he thinks?

Every true believer has a constant painful reminder of human depravity in his own heart. Believers are a people who readily and painfully confess, “In my flesh dwelleth no good thing!” Man is not good, but evil at heart. This world is what it is because man is what he is, sinful, depraved, and vile.

Greg says “I been riding horses and packing mules since I was knee high to a grasshopper, I buried more wore out horses from mountain travel than Ralphy boy has even owned in his pathetic bullshit life.”

Ralph gets there on his own feet rather than wearing out mules and burying them. He doesn’r resort to name calling as you do. You are the one with a “pathetic bullshit life.”

To tell you the truth, Greg, I think a lot more than a few are on the dope trail…..The dope makes them think that their way is the right one, irregardless of whether or not it is….that’s why they call it DOPE! Don’t expect to change their way of thinking…it’s a mindset the dope has hold of…they have to break it’s hold before they can think straight.

Greg says “back packed a bull elk yesterday” I thought the wolves got them all! Lucky you.

Go spend more time in the back country. You need more time to think.

May have been…May have been…May have been. I never saw no rodeo livestock running thru Moran Junction, the Park North of Jackson, Teton National Park, Union Pass, Or Yellow Boned Park. I’ll stick with several years of Russian Documented Science and Canadian Also. I saw the reply Lee. I chose to ignore it. I am in the back country, via Sat phone connect, and in my wall tent looking at my lap top. Been thinking how dumb you are.

Actually no, wolves now, and deer later, Insults you say ! I was stating facts…You should try the more direct insults Lee, instead of the affable ones you like so well.

Now were even, I never respected you. I see you took the bait right off didn’t you Lee, I said HUNT them, not KILL them. I could hunt them to spy on them, which I do, or photo them, I do that to. You don’t need to look for them in the dark, how would you see them, AND I am not packing night vision goggles this trip or infra red lighting. I’ll not shoot one even when its legal, if ever. Why would I, can’t eat it, or you could eat it, but I ain’t never gonna eat dog, and if I ain’t gonna eat it, I sure ain’t gonna kill it. Self defense is different, I will protect me and mine. You never knew me enough to respect me Lee, respect is earned in my world, not given. I didn’t sse no wolves for the last three days, just heard them, howling, I howled back, pretty good at howling like a wolf too, I think they like me. I gotta pack and move to 35 for Smoke Pole deer. see ya.

Ah, Lee, there you go again being affable, I woulda just called me a LIAR and POACHER and a ruthless bastard animal hater killer, you know anti-hunter fella, the more direct approach.

As far as 150 pound wolves go, I know the government trapper done the deed and I believe the man.

As far as elk being in the woods I never said there were no elk left in Idaho, I said their being decimated by wolves hunting them 24-7-365. Man only gets to hunt them for 2-3 weeks a year. And we only get one per man, not like the wolf who gets 25+ per wolf, and I’m being conservative on the wolfs bag limits.

1995, Idaho had 180,000-200,000 elk….2008 Idaho State Fish and Game claim we have 180,000 elk,, Several hundred hunters and mysself included disagree. There is 20,000 at best.

Why do you think hunters are all buying tags to hunt up north.

It is not in the best interests of the IFG to be honest about this train wreck their BOSS, the FWS has forced onto them, and us.

Those people need their jobs, they got mortgages, car payments, kids in school, or college.

I know what I’m seeing, and is not what they are telling.

Now I got one elk the wolves ain’t gonna eat, I stole it right out their ravenous mouths…I don’t need to shoot em, or nail them to a tree, and I sure don’t want no filthy wolf hide on my wall.

STARVATION is what wolves get, thanks to ignorance and over trusting of government number cookers in FWS and IFG.

Your theory of managment and final death by STARVATION of wolves which ate themselves out of their own damn food supply is on you morons, not us. STARVATION is more BRUTAL than strangulation, trapping, or even CRUCIFIXION, even if it is a CATHOLIC lie.

Of course the constitution was fundamentally flawed. That’s why we have needed 27 amendments to get where we are today.

Does anyone disagree with the right to bear arms (2nd), think we should be allowed slaves (13th), thinks women shouldn’t be allowed to vote (19th)?

Anyone that worships the constitution should keep this in mind.